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 367,368 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

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as stated above

ITA 7644/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited Addl. Cit, Range 7(1) V. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Sandoz House, Dr. Annie Besant Road Worli, Mumbai - 400018 Mumbai Pan: Aaach2914F Appellant Respondent Assessee Represented By : Shri Rajan Vora & Shri Pranay Gandhi Revenue Represented By : Shri Rajneesh Yadav

Section 144C(5)Section 35DSection 92C(2)

…tion has been recorded by the Assessing Officer as to the incorrectness of the claim of the Assessee that no expenditure has been incurred for earning exempt income and he relied on following case laws for the above contention: (i). Maxopp Investment Limited (402 ITR 640) (SC); (ii). Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. (394 ITR 449) (SC); (iii). Reliance Capital Asset Management Ltd. (ITA No 487 of 2015) (dated 19 September 2017) (Bombay HC) affirmed by SC (98 Taxmann.com 361 (SC); (iv). Sociedade De Fomento Industrial (P.) Ltd. (ITA No 34 of 2014); (v). Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd. (ITA No 1017 of 2017) (Bom…

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

ITA 1717/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 115Section 44Section 80G

…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. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1716/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 115Section 44Section 80G

…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. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1715/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 115Section 44Section 80G

…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…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Mandava Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 54/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y.

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y. ITA Nos. Appellant Respondent M/s. Mandava Deputy 26/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Holdings Private Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle-1(2), 27/Hyd/2022 2017-18 [PAN: AAFCM4964M] Hyderabad Assistant M/s. Mandava 54/Hyd/2022 2017-18 Commissioner of Holdings Private Income Tax, Limited, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAFCM4964M] नििाारर…

Mandava Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 27/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y.

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y. ITA Nos. Appellant Respondent M/s. Mandava Deputy 26/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Holdings Private Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle-1(2), 27/Hyd/2022 2017-18 [PAN: AAFCM4964M] Hyderabad Assistant M/s. Mandava 54/Hyd/2022 2017-18 Commissioner of Holdings Private Income Tax, Limited, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAFCM4964M] नििाारर…

Mandava Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, all these appeals are dismissed

ITA 26/HYD/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y.

For Appellant: Shri P. Vinod, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / नििाारण अपीलार्थी / प्रत् यर्थी / वर्ा / A.Y. ITA Nos. Appellant Respondent M/s. Mandava Deputy 26/Hyd/2022 2016-17 Holdings Private Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, Hyderabad Central Circle-1(2), 27/Hyd/2022 2017-18 [PAN: AAFCM4964M] Hyderabad Assistant M/s. Mandava 54/Hyd/2022 2017-18 Commissioner of Holdings Private Income Tax, Limited, Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAFCM4964M] नििाारर…

Jignesh Jaswantrai Mehta, Mumbai vs. Asstt.Commissioner of Income Tax-27(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 536/MUM/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Sept 2022AY 2012-2013
For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Ms. Vranda U Matkari
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…e investment made in tax free securities and therefore no disallowance under Section 14A of the Act was warranted. Without prejudice to the aforesaid he submitted that as per the judgment of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT [402 ITR 640] only expenditure which were related to earning dividend income could have been disallowed under Section 14A of the Act in case where such shares were held as stock-in- trade. 8. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative placed reliance upon submissions dated 27.06.2022. She submitted that the first contention of the Appellant that he is i…

Jindal Power Limiteed, Raigarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Incoe Tax, Circle 1(1), Bilaspur

ITA 199/RPR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.199/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. AnanyaFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 14ASection 151(1)Section 37

…sallowance so made by him u/s.14A r.w.r. 8D could not be sustained and was liable to be struck down. In support of his aforesaid contention the Ld. AR had relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp investment Ltd vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) and that in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co Ltd vs. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC). Also, the Ld. AR had drawn support from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. M/s. Hindustan Clean Energy Ltd., ITA No. 268/2018 dated 05.07.2018. Apart from that, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as the asses…

State Bank of India (Sucessor to Erstwhile State Bank of Indore), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 277/MUM/2022[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 244ASection 271(1)(c)

…ts appeal: - “Grounds of Appeal 1. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and in facts and circumstances of the case confirming the disallowance u/s 14A made by the assessing officer. 1.1 The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Apex court in Maxopp Investments Ltd (402 ITR 640) has clearly held that only when expenditure has been actually incurred in earning tax free income, whether held as strategic investment or otherwise, any disallowance is called for but not when investments are held in business as stock in trade and no expenditure has been actually incurred, in which case no disallowance is warranted. 1.2 The Ld.…

M/S. Ukn Properties Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1739/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2013-14 UKN Properties Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner No.12, 1st Floor, of Income Tax, St. Patricks Shopping Arcade, Circle 7(1)(1), Residency Road, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 025. PAN: AAACU 3584A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Narendra Sharma, Advocate Respondent by : Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 14.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 16.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This ap…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit) Kolkata vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd

ITA/65/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The decision of the Hon’ble Suprem…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit), Kolkata vs. M/S. Century Plyboards (I) Ltd

ITA/159/2018HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The decision of the Hon’ble Suprem…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit) Kolkata vs. Century Plyboards (India) Ltd

ITA/39/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The decision of the Hon’ble Suprem…

M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1629/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, Pan: Aaacm 9840P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.2. This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals), Bangalore-9, Bangalore Dated 31.3.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 3. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Deduction U/S. 35(2Ab) Computed On Net Expenditure As Opposed To Gross Expenditure Disallowance Of Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts I) Disallowance Of Provision For Long Term Service Award Disallowance Of Expenditure U/S. 14A Of The Act Ii) Page 2 Of 67

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 35Section 37Section 43BSection 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, of Income Tax, LTU, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, PAN: AAACM 9840P Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent by : Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 01.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member 2. This appeal is against the order of the CIT(Appeals), Bangalo…

Kirloskar Pneumatic Co.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 983/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.983/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle-14, Hadapsar Industrial Estate, Vs Pune. Pune Solapur Road, Hadapsar, Pune – 411013. Pan:Aaack 2479 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri C.H.Naniwadeker – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Namely Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune Dated 09.04.2018 Emanating From The Order Of Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14, Pune Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding Disallowance Of Rs.57,44,010/- U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D Without Appreciating The Facts & Submissions Made In This Behalf. He Also Failed To Appreciate That Before Invoking Rule 8D, The A.O. Has Not Recorded His Satisfaction As Required By Law. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding 50% Ad-Hoc Disallowance Of Gift & Present Of Rs.16,06,635/- U/S

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.983/PUN/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-14, Hadapsar Industrial Estate, Vs Pune. Pune Solapur Road, Hadapsar, PUne – 411013. PAN:AAACK 2479 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri C.H.Naniwadeker – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 13/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 12/09/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an…

Sanjivkumar A. Shah, Valsad vs. I. T. Office, Valsad Circle, Valsad

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are dismissed

ITA 187/SRT/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr Arjun Lal Sainiआ.अ.सं./Ita No.187/Srt/2021 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Sanjivkumar A Shah Income Tax Department, 4Th Floor, Amar Arcade, Valsad Circle, Valsad Vs Halar Road, Valsad-396001 -396001 Pan : Acpps 0794 L अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…he contention whether indirect expense was rightly disallowed when there was no direct expenditure incurred by assessee. The Ld. NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) by referring the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. 7 Sanjivkumar A Shah CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC) and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd. in ITA No. 470 of 2016 dated 21.11.2016 held that a combine reading of those decisions hold that Assessing Officer is required to compute the disallowance as per section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D. The said decisions also discussed the applicability of Section 14A(2) when…

Titan Industries Limited, Hosur vs. JCIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2239/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana (Sr. Advocate) for Ms. Manasa Ananthan (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92A(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी महावीर िसंह, उपा"" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.2239/Chny/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Titan Company Ltd. JCIT, बनाम/ (earlier Titan Industries Ltd) Range-III, Number 3, SIPCOT Industrial Complex, Chennai. Vs. Hosur, Krishnagiri (TN) -635 126. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAACT-5131-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appella…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ms. Pnb Housing Finance Ltd

In the result, the appeals filed by the

ITA/308/2022HC Delhi07 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

…issue is no longer res integra.It is an admitted fact that the exempt income was earned by the assessee from the investment held by it as stock-in-trade. This issue has been conclusively determined by the Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT, [2018] 15 SCC 523. In this matter, the Supreme Court was concerned with a batch of appeals which also included a challenge to the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court reported in CIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 (P&H)and the facts of the said case are para materia to the case in hand. In the case of State Bank of Patiala, the AO restricted t…

Nucleus Software Exports Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-18(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as indicated above

ITA 3449/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajkumar, AdvFor Respondent: 09/06/2022
Section 115JSection 14A

…see has not recorded any objective satisfaction as to why the allocation of indirect expenses made by the assessee is not sufficient to meet the expenses attributable for earning exempt dividend income. 10. In the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018 402 ITR 640 the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:- “ 41) 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 cor…