Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

402 ITR 640Supreme Court of India2018#21 most cited

What is Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

1,596

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maxopp Investment Ltd v CIT · Maxopp SC 2018 · Section 14A disallowance · Rule 8D application · expenditure for exempt income · only dividend bearing investments · satisfaction Section 14A(2) · strategic investment disallowance · disallowance not automatic · 402 ITR 640

Also reported as

91 Taxmann.com 154254 Taxmann 325301 CTR 489

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 37(1)Section 1961Section 250Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(1)section 14a(2)strategic investmentdisallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 10(34)section 14asection 36(1)(vii)section 40a(2)enduring benefitbook profitssection 115j

Judgments citing Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. ACIT-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 1451/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1452/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Bank of India, 8th Floor, Taxation Department, Star House, C-5, G-Block, Bandra – Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400051 PAN: AAACB0472C v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai – 400020 ITA No.1548/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Coal India Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

M/S Coal India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata

ITA 1407/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 1Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

Coal India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.: 466/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 622/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. M/s. Coal India Ltd. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 467/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Coal India Ltd. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata (Appellant) Vs. (Respondent) PAN: AABCC3929J ITA No.: 623/KOL/2018 Assessment Year: 201…

Apex Urban Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad

Accordingly, we herein direct the AO to vacate the disallowance of Rs. 13,200/- made by him. The Grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3 are allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1778/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1778/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Apex Urban Infrastructure Vs. Dcit, Private Limited, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aafcp1027Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 13/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Company Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Hyderabad, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (For Short, “Ao”) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 31/10/2019 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Assessee Company Has Assailed The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Manjunatha G., Accountant Member and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.1778/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2017-18) Apex Urban Infrastructure Vs. DCIT, Private Limited, Central Circle-2(3), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AAFCP1027Q (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by: Shri K. Vinoth Kannan, Sr. AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing: 06/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of 13/01/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / ORDER PER. RAVIS…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…assessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances offered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This finding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC), paras 31 to 33 and 41. The Ld. AR further submitted that the issue as regards restriction of addition under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to only dividend bearing investments stands settled by the aforesaid decisions of this Hon'ble Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, being ITA No. 239/Kol/2015 [AY 2009-10] (Eureka Forbes Ltd.…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eureka Forbs Ltd, Kolkata

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…assessee in its returns, ignoring the revised figures of disallowances offered by the assessee during the course of appeal proceedings. This finding is also in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC), paras 31 to 33 and 41. The Ld. AR further submitted that the issue as regards restriction of addition under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to only dividend bearing investments stands settled by the aforesaid decisions of this Hon'ble Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case, being ITA No. 239/Kol/2015 [AY 2009-10] (Eureka Forbes Ltd.…

Kuntal Hasmukhlal Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 8360/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarkuntal Hasmukhlal Shah Acit-4(1)(1) 104, 1St Floor, Plot No. 53, Aayakar Bhawan, Panchsheel, P. M. Shukla Vs. Churchgate, Marg, C-Road, Mumbai-400 020 Churchgate, Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aagps5867F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashok Shah, Ld. Ar Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 12.01.2026

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…establishing any nexus between the expenditure claimed and the earning of exempt income. 6. The learned CIT(A), however, did not accept the contentions of the assessee. Relying upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (402 ITR 640) and Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (394 ITR 449), as well as the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (370 ITR 338), the learned CIT(A) held that section 14A applies even where the assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred in relation to exempt income. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata vs. Techno Electric & Engineering Company Ltd, Uttar Pradesh

Appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…the nature of business as well as the investments made by the appellant and has applied the provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D mechanically. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited Vs. CIT 91 Taxmann.com 154 (SC). The appellant also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Limited reported in 323 ITR 518 (P&H). In the said case, the Hon'ble High Court held that when there is no evidence to show that interest bearing funds were invested in investments which had generated exempt income…

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1549/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: MS. SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. J. Pardiwala, Sr. Advocate and Shri C. Naresh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

…ses of Rs. 24,88,528/- u/s 14A, meaning thereby that assessee had incurred some expenses, however these have been computed as per Rule 8D. Ld. Assessing Officer relied on Para 39 of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgement in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC), Hon'ble High Court Judgement in the case of Godrej and Boyce and Hon'ble Special Bench Of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of M/s Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. Further, ld. Assessing Officer observed that the SLP in the case PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala had been dismissed by Hon. Supreme Court. Also, in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank of Pati…

Bank of India, Mumbai vs. The ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 1397/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 90

…ses of Rs.24,88,528/- u/s 14A, meaning thereby that assessee had incurred some expenses, however these have been computed as per Rule 8D. Ld. Assessing Officer relied on Para 39 of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgement in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC). Hon'ble High Court Of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Godrej and Boyce and Hon'ble Special Bench Of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of M/s Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. Further, Id. Assessing Officer observed that the SLP in the case PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala had been dismissed by Hon. Supreme Court. Also, in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank o…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

ITA 1244/DEL/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘E’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1244/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) DCIT, vs. M/s. Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1, Noida Flat No.14, Ground Floor, DDA MIG Suraj Apartment, PulPehladPur, New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN :AACCB7981J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate Shri Virsain Aggarwal, AR REVENUE BY : Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date of Order : 22.12.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Noida vs. M/S Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

ITA 1240/DEL/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2025

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES ‘E’: NEW DELHI. BEFORE SHRIS.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1244/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) DCIT, vs. M/s. Bright Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle 1, Noida Flat No.14, Ground Floor, DDA MIG Suraj Apartment, PulPehladPur, New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN :AACCB7981J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rohit Kapoor, Advocate Shri Virsain Aggarwal, AR REVENUE BY : Shri Abhijeet Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date of Order : 22.12.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :…

Hincon Holdings Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 15(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2961/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosainhincon Holdings Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward 15(2)(1) Hincon House, Lbs Marg Mumbai. Vikhroli (W), Mumbai – 400 083 Pan/Gir No. Aaach2592M (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 45

…nfina Finance Private Limited (supra), the Hon'ble Tribunal has relied on the below case laws and held that shares held as stock in trade are to be excluded for the purpose of computing disallowance under section 14A: a. Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) b. South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1 (SC) c. ACIT v. Vireet Investment Ltd. 82 taxmann.com 415 d. PCIT vs. Punjab National Bank [2022] 140 taxmann.com 131 (Delhi) e. Religare Securities Ltd. in ITA No. 7291/Del/2019 5 Hincon Holdings Ltd, Mumbai. 12. The Appellant further relies on the following decisions: a. Geecee Vent…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -Central -1 vs. R.J. Corp. Ltd

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA/743/2025HC Delhi12 Dec 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR

Section 14Section 14A

…ITA 743/2025 Page 1 of 18 $~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 12.12.2025 + ITA 743/2025 CM APPL. 78546/2025 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -CENTRAL -1 .....Appellant Through: Mr. Ruchir Bhatia SSC with Mr. Anant Mann JSC. versus R.J. CORP. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Divyansh Jain, Mr. Paritosh Jain, Mr. Apoorv Saini and Mr. Abhishek, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR V. KAMESWAR RAO…

Bhisma Realty Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Building Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5694/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19 Bhishma Realty Limited. Vs Dcit, Cc-1(4), 3Rd Floor, Sir Vithaldas Central Building Chambers, 16 Mumbai Mumbai 400020 Sanmarg Marg, Fort, Mumbai 400001 Pan: (Aaacb5995N) Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Ms. Neha Paranjpe, Ar Respondent By : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A) 47, Mumbai Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025- 26/1078523862(1) Dated 15.07.2025 Passed Against Assessment Order U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 03.02.2021 For Ay 2018-19. 2. The Sole Issue Raised In The Present Appeal Is In Respect Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Income-Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Rules’) Of Rs. 20,06,2346/- Against Suomoto Disallowance Made By The Assessee Of Rs. 94,147/-.

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Paranjpe, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y, the incremental disallowance made by the ld. AO is deleted by restricting it to the suomoto disallowance made by the assessee in its return. For this, we draw our force from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC) wherein it held that: “Having regard to the language of Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance under Section 14A was not correct. It will be in…

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Hubtown Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3038/MUM/2025[2018 19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal a/w Shri FenilFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 135Section 14ASection 153ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 69ASection 80G

…nce as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds Indie (P) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CIT 7120161 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments of the Delhi High Court in Cheminvest v CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33/234 Taxman 761/61 taxmann.com 118 and CIT v. Holcim (P) Ltd (2015) 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi). Relevant portion of the judgment in McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. (supra) reads:- "8. The decision in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd…

Hubtown Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1601/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal a/w Shri FenilFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 135Section 14ASection 153ASection 250Section 37(1)Section 69ASection 80G

…nce as held in Pr. CIT v. McDonalds Indie (P) Ltd. ITA 725/2018 decided on 22nd October, 2018 cannot exceed the exempt income of that year. This decision follows the ratio and judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. v. CIT 7120161 402 ITR 640/254 Taxman 325/91 taxmann.com 154 and the earlier judgments of the Delhi High Court in Cheminvest v CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33/234 Taxman 761/61 taxmann.com 118 and CIT v. Holcim (P) Ltd (2015) 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi). Relevant portion of the judgment in McDonalds India (P.) Ltd. (supra) reads:- "8. The decision in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd…