Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Ring Plus Aqua Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-8(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1059/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1062/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1061/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Ring Plus Aqua Ltd. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-8(1) 6Th Floor, Aayakar D-3/4, Stice, Sinnar Shirdi Vs. Road, Musalgaon, Nashik- Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. 422003, Maharashtra, India.

…given considerable emphasis on the issue that the provisions of sec 14A rw Rule 8D cannot be invoked in respect of investments which are strategic in nature. However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in above referred case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs CIT reported in 402 ITR 640 has held that the dominant purpose of investment is of no consequence for applicability of provisions of section 14A r.w. Rule 8D. In view of the above discussions, with due respect to my Ld Predecessor, it is held that the decision A.Ys. 2013-14 to 2015-16 Ring Plus Aqua Ltd. rendered by him in A.Y. 2012-13 in appellant's own case cannot be foll…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indusind Bank Limited, Mumbai

…e disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admittedly held as stock in trade, the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) decided the same against the assessee. 4.3. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) had categorically held that normally investments held as stock in trade would also be liable for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. However, with respect to investments held as stock in trade by the b…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indusind Bank Limited, Mumbai

…e disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admittedly held as stock in trade, the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) decided the same against the assessee. 4.3. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) had categorically held that normally investments held as stock in trade would also be liable for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. However, with respect to investments held as stock in trade by the b…

Indusind Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai

…e disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admittedly held as stock in trade, the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) decided the same against the assessee. 4.3. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) had categorically held that normally investments held as stock in trade would also be liable for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. However, with respect to investments held as stock in trade by the b…

Indusind Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 2(3)(2), Mumbai

…e disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admittedly held as stock in trade, the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) decided the same against the assessee. 4.3. We find that the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640(SC) had categorically held that normally investments held as stock in trade would also be liable for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. However, with respect to investments held as stock in trade by the b…

ACIT, Cir- 14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Wns Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2473 & 2474/MUM/2021 (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) ACIT – 14(1)(2) v. WNS Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 455, 4th Floor PL-10, Godrej & Boyce Complex Pirojshanagar, L.B.S. Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Eastern Express Highway Mumbai - 400020 Vikhroli (W), Mumbai - 400079 PAN: AAACW2598L Appellant Respondent WNS Global Services Pvt. Ltd., v. DCIT – 14(1)(2) Plant No. 10, Godrej & Boyce Complex Room No. 455, 4th Floor Pirojshanagar, L.B.S. Marg Aay…

ACIT, Circle 14 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. Wns Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2473 & 2474/MUM/2021 (A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2013-14) ACIT – 14(1)(2) v. WNS Global Services Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 455, 4th Floor PL-10, Godrej & Boyce Complex Pirojshanagar, L.B.S. Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Eastern Express Highway Mumbai - 400020 Vikhroli (W), Mumbai - 400079 PAN: AAACW2598L Appellant Respondent WNS Global Services Pvt. Ltd., v. DCIT – 14(1)(2) Plant No. 10, Godrej & Boyce Complex Room No. 455, 4th Floor Pirojshanagar, L.B.S. Marg Aay…

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

…chedule 1 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the assessee itself had declared expenses that was relatable to the earning of such exempt income and ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd., 91 Taxmann.com 154 wherein the Apex Court has upheld the principle of disallowance U/S.14A r.w.r. 8D? (iv). Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of loss from Jeevan Suraksha Fund ignoring the settled position of law that income includes loss and that the loss…

ACIT-3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blelife Insurance Corporation Of India V. Dcit – 3(2)(1) Central Office, F&A Department Room No. 608 3Rd Floor, West Wing Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent Acit – 3(2)(1) V. M/S. Life Insurance Corporation Of India Central Office Room No. 674, 6Th Floor “Yogakshema” Jeevan Bima Marg Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacl0582H Appellant Respondent

…chedule 1 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the assessee itself had declared expenses that was relatable to the earning of such exempt income and ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd., 91 Taxmann.com 154 wherein the Apex Court has upheld the principle of disallowance U/S.14A r.w.r. 8D? (iv). Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO on account of loss from Jeevan Suraksha Fund ignoring the settled position of law that income includes loss and that the loss…

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Life Insurance Dcit 3(2)(1), Corporation Of India, Room No.608, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, F&A Department, Maharshi Karve Road, Vs. 3Rd Floor, West Wing, New Marine Lines, “Yogakshema”, Mumbai - 400020 Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacl0582H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit 3(2)(1), M/S. Life Insurance Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Corporation Of India, Aayakar Bhavan, Central Office, M.K. Road, Vs. Yogakshema, Mumbai - 400020 Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 005 Pan: Aaacl0582H (Appellant) (Respondent)

…Schedule 1 of the IT. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the assessee itself had declared expenses that was relatable to the earning of such exempt income and ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd., 91 Taxmann.com 154 wherein the Apex Court has upheld the principle of disallowance U/S.14A r.w.r. 8D? (ii) The appellant prays that the order of CTT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of Assessing Officer be restored. (iii) The appellant craves leave to amend, alter, delete or add grounds which may be necessary.” 3. Briefly stated facts necessary…

Asst. Comm of Income Tax 3(2) (1), Mumbai vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Life Insurance Dcit 3(2)(1), Corporation Of India, Room No.608, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, F&A Department, Maharshi Karve Road, Vs. 3Rd Floor, West Wing, New Marine Lines, “Yogakshema”, Mumbai - 400020 Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacl0582H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Acit 3(2)(1), M/S. Life Insurance Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Corporation Of India, Aayakar Bhavan, Central Office, M.K. Road, Vs. Yogakshema, Mumbai - 400020 Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 005 Pan: Aaacl0582H (Appellant) (Respondent)

…Schedule 1 of the IT. Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the assessee itself had declared expenses that was relatable to the earning of such exempt income and ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd., 91 Taxmann.com 154 wherein the Apex Court has upheld the principle of disallowance U/S.14A r.w.r. 8D? (ii) The appellant prays that the order of CTT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of Assessing Officer be restored. (iii) The appellant craves leave to amend, alter, delete or add grounds which may be necessary.” 3. Briefly stated facts necessary…