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

DCIT, Circle - 19(1), Delhi vs. Punjab National Bank (Earlier Known As Oriental Bank of Commerce), Delhi

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 3161/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Punjab National Bank (Earlier Circle-19(1), Know As Oriental Bank Of Delhi Commerce), Harsha Bhawan, E Block, Connaught Place, Delhi Pan: Aaaco0191M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. K.V.S.R. Krishana, Ca Department By Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, Cit(Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(2)(v)

…) in assessee’s case(s) has made it clear that the impugned disallowance provision in section 14A read with Rule 8D itself does not apply in an instance involving investments held as stock in trade in light of 5 | P a g e Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). We thus adopt judicial consistency to reject the Revenue’s instant second substantive ground in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 7. The third substantive issue between the parties herein is that of disallowance of Rs.21,46,25,828/- involving depreciation on temporary wooden structures wherein the learned Assessing Officer had held the same…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi 1 vs. M/S Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd

Appeal is dismissed being covered

ITA/511/2025HC Delhi10 Oct 2025

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

Section 14Section 14ASection 260A

…ITA 511/2025 Page 1 of 12 $~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 10.10.2025 + ITA 511/2025 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI 1.....Appellant Through: Mr. Vipul Agrawal, SSC with Ms. Sakshi Shairwal, Mr. Akshat Singh, JSCs and Mr. Gaoraang Ranjan and Ms Harshita Kotru, Advs. versus M/S AMADEUS INDIA PVT. LTD. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Mayank Nagi and Mr. Tarun Singh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE…

JCIT OSD Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Hdfc Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the

ITA 2260/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…g Rule 8D and thereby restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to the suo-moto disallowance made pursuant to Accountant's report. He also relied on certain judicial precedents decided on the issue related to 'satisfaction',i.e. Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),PCIT vs.BSE Ltd. [2020] 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay HC),Trent Limited v. DCIT (ITA No. 4074/Mum/2024), Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT 2(1) (83 taxmann.com 85) (Mum Tribunal), Smartchem Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (85 taxmann.com 43) (Mum Tribunal), J.M. Financial Services Ltd. v. JCIT [54 ITR(T) 120] (Mum Tribunal),M/s Avinash Bhosale Infra…

JCIT(OSD) Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Hdfc Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the

ITA 2259/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…g Rule 8D and thereby restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to the suo-motu disallowance made pursuant to Accountant's report. He also relied on certain judicial precedents decided on the issue related to 'satisfaction',i.e. Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),PCIT vs.BSE Ltd. [2020] 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay HC),Trent Limited v. DCIT (ITA No. 4074/Mum/2024), Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT 2(1) (83 taxmann.com 85) (Mum Tribunal), Smartchem Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (85 taxmann.com 43) (Mum Tribunal), J.M. Financial Services Ltd. v. JCIT [54 ITR(T) 120] (Mum Tribunal),M/s Avinash Bhosale Infra…

JCIT(OSD) Circle 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Hdfc Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the

ITA 2258/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…g Rule 8D and thereby restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to the suo-moto disallowance made pursuant to Accountant's report. He also relied on certain judicial precedents decided on the issue related to 'satisfaction',i.e. Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),PCIT vs.BSE Ltd. [2020] 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay HC),Trent Limited v. DCIT (ITA No. 4074/Mum/2024), Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT 2(1) (83 taxmann.com 85) (Mum Tribunal), Smartchem Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (85 taxmann.com 43) (Mum Tribunal), J.M. Financial Services Ltd. v. JCIT [54 ITR(T) 120] (Mum Tribunal),M/s Avinash Bhosale Infra…

Hdfc Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 2 (3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the above stated appeals of the

ITA 1573/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…g Rule 8D and thereby restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to the suo-moto disallowance made pursuant to Accountant's report. He also relied on certain judicial precedents decided on the issue related to 'satisfaction',i.e. Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),PCIT vs.BSE Ltd. [2020] 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay HC),Trent Limited v. DCIT (ITA No. 4074/Mum/2024), Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT 2(1) (83 taxmann.com 85) (Mum Tribunal), Smartchem Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (85 taxmann.com 43) (Mum Tribunal), J.M. Financial Services Ltd. v. JCIT [54 ITR(T) 120] (Mum Tribunal),M/s Avinash Bhosale Infra…

Hdfc Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - 2 (3) (1), Mumbai

ITA 1555/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…g Rule 8D and thereby restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to the suo-motu disallowance made pursuant to Accountant's report. He also relied on certain judicial precedents decided on the issue related to 'satisfaction',i.e. Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC),PCIT vs.BSE Ltd. [2020] 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bombay HC),Trent Limited v. DCIT (ITA No. 4074/Mum/2024), Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. Vs ACIT 2(1) (83 taxmann.com 85) (Mum Tribunal), Smartchem Technologies Ltd. v. ACIT (85 taxmann.com 43) (Mum Tribunal), J.M. Financial Services Ltd. v. JCIT [54 ITR(T) 120] (Mum Tribunal),M/s Avinash Bhosale Infra…

M/S. Fortune Gourmet Specialities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4191/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Smt. Renu Jauhrim/S. Fortune Gourment Vs. Acit Circle 6(3)(1) Specialities Private Limited Aayakar Bhavan, 107 Adhyaru Industrial Mumbai-400020. Estate, Sun Mill Comound, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacf4952B Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan KakkadFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (Sr. DR)
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 250

…er is not satisfied on an objective criteria in the context of its accounts, that suo motu disallowance claimed by the assessee is not proper. 12. In fact, the Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 91 taxmann.com 154/254 Тахтан 325/402 ITR 640 while upholding the view of the Delhi High Court has held that the Assessing Officer needs to record his non-satisfaction having regard to the sou motu disallowances claimed by the assessee in the context of its accounts. It is only thereafter, the occasion to apply rule 8D of the Rules for apportionment of expenses can arise. 13. In the present…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 4181/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…urred” refers to actual expenditure and not to some imagined/notional/presumptive expenditure. Thus, no disallowance can be made on notional or presumptive basis in the absence of any actual expenditure. The Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [(2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC)], while confirming applicability of Section 14A, emphasized that disallowance must be linked to actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income. Further CBDT Circular No. 5/2014, dated 11.02.2014 clarifies that Section 14A applies only to "expenditure incurred” and hence if no expenditure is incurred, disallowance cannot be triggered.…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 4136/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…urred” refers to actual expenditure and not to some imagined/notional/presumptive expenditure. Thus, no disallowance can be made on notional or presumptive basis in the absence of any actual expenditure. The Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [(2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC)], while confirming applicability of Section 14A, emphasized that disallowance must be linked to actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income. Further CBDT Circular No. 5/2014, dated 11.02.2014 clarifies that Section 14A applies only to "expenditure incurred” and hence if no expenditure is incurred, disallowance cannot be triggered.…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(3), Mumbai vs. Pradeep Phulchand Agarwal, Mumbai

ITA 3852/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 69C

…urred‖ refers to actual expenditure and not to some imagined/notional/presumptive expenditure. Thus, no disallowance can be made on notional or presumptive basis in the absence of any actual expenditure. The Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [(2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC)], while confirming applicability of Section 14A, emphasized that disallowance must be linked to actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income. Further CBDT Circular No. 5/2014, dated 11.02.2014 clarifies that Section 14A applies only to "expenditure incurred‖ and hence if no expenditure is incurred, disallowance cannot be triggered.…

Titan Company Limited, Hosur vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 393/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.393/Chny/2018 & आयकर अपील सं./ It(Tp)A No.89/Chny/2018 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Titan Company Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Income No.3, Spicot Industrial Complex, Vs. Tax, Hosur, Krishnagiri – 635 126. Ltu-2, [Pan: Aaact 5131A] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana &For Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद! एवं माननीय एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद! के सम) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.393/Chny/2018 & आयकर अपील सं./ IT(TP)A No.89/Chny/2018 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Titan Company Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner of Income No.3, SPICOT Industrial Complex, Vs. Tax, Hosur, Krishnagiri – 635 126. LTU-2, [PAN: AAACT 5131A] Chennai. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथK की ओर से/…

Ecl Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6543/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal & Shri Prabhash Shankarecl Finance Limited, V/S. Deputy Commissioner Of Tower 3, Wing B, Kohinoor बनाम Income Tax, Central Circle City Mall, Kohinoor City, Kirol – 1(1), Cgo Building, New Road, Kurla West, Mumbai – Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 070, Maharashtra 400020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabce4916D .. Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak,ARFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, (Sr.AR)
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ECL Finance Limited, v/s. Deputy Commissioner of Tower 3, Wing B, Kohinoor बनाम Income Tax, Central Circle City Mall, Kohinoor City, Kirol – 1(1), CGO Building, New Road, Kurla West, Mumbai – Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 070, Maharashtra 400020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AABCE4916D .. Appellant/अपीलार्थी Respondent/प्रतिवादी Appellant by : Shri Ravikant Pathak,AR Respondent by : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, (Sr.AR) Date of Hearing 21.07.2025 Date of Pron…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 5(1)(1), Noida vs. Ebixcash Limited, Noida

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and by assessee is allowed

ITA 4738/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year-2018-19) M/S Ebix Cash Ltd., Asst. Cit, Plot No.122 & 123, Nsez, Phase- Circle-5(1)(1), Ii, Noida, Vs. Gautambudh Nagar, Gautambudh Nagar-201305 Noida, Uttarparadesh. Uttar Pradesh, India. Pan-Aaace9981H (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, M/S Ebix Cash Ltd., Circle-5(1)(1), Plot No.122 & 123, Nsez, Gautambudh Nagar, Vs. Phase-Ii, Noida, Noida, Uttar Paradesh. Gautambudh Nagar-201305 Uttar Pradesh, India. Pan-Aaace9981H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca & Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Department By Shrirajesh Kumar Dhanesta,Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 14/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

…he same time, assessee also deserves to be benefited for the reason that no valid satisfaction for disallowance was recorded by the Tax Authorities. Reliance can be placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the light of aforesaid, we are inclined to allow the ground of appeal and the impugned disallowance is deleted. 6. Ground No.2 & 3 raised by the assessee arises out of the adjustment of Rs.5,19,33,980/- made by the Ld. Tax Authority by invoking section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 by computing income un…

Ebix Cash Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT Circle-5(1)(1), Gautam Budh Nagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and by assessee is allowed

ITA 4453/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year-2018-19) M/S Ebix Cash Ltd., Asst. Cit, Plot No.122 & 123, Nsez, Phase- Circle-5(1)(1), Ii, Noida, Vs. Gautambudh Nagar, Gautambudh Nagar-201305 Noida, Uttarparadesh. Uttar Pradesh, India. Pan-Aaace9981H (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst. Cit, M/S Ebix Cash Ltd., Circle-5(1)(1), Plot No.122 & 123, Nsez, Gautambudh Nagar, Vs. Phase-Ii, Noida, Noida, Uttar Paradesh. Gautambudh Nagar-201305 Uttar Pradesh, India. Pan-Aaace9981H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca & Shri Ankit Kumar, Adv. Department By Shrirajesh Kumar Dhanesta,Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 14/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/09/2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm:

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 14A(1)Section 250

…he same time, assessee also deserves to be benefited for the reason that no valid satisfaction for disallowance was recorded by the Tax Authorities. Reliance can be placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the light of aforesaid, we are inclined to allow the ground of appeal and the impugned disallowance is deleted. 6. Ground No.2 & 3 raised by the assessee arises out of the adjustment of Rs.5,19,33,980/- made by the Ld. Tax Authority by invoking section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 by computing income un…

Candor Kolkata One Hi-Tech Structures Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-5(2), New Delhi

ITA 193/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 3154/Del/2019 Candor Gurgaon One Realty Addl. CIT, 2015-15 Projects Private Limited, Spl Range-2, 1102, Tower B, 11th Floor, New Delhi Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN: AAACU8046K 4598/Del/2019 Addl. CIT, Candor Gurgaon One Realty 2015-16 Spl Range-2, Projects Private Limited, New Delhi 1005, Roots Tower, Plot No.7, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. PAN: A…

Candor Gurgaon One Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Unitech Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT Spl. Range-2, New Delhi

ITA 8377/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 3154/Del/2019 Candor Gurgaon One Realty Addl. CIT, 2015-15 Projects Private Limited, Spl Range-2, 1102, Tower B, 11th Floor, New Delhi Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN: AAACU8046K 4598/Del/2019 Addl. CIT, Candor Gurgaon One Realty 2015-16 Spl Range-2, Projects Private Limited, New Delhi 1005, Roots Tower, Plot No.7, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. PAN: A…

Candor Gurgaon Two Developers and Project Ltd. (Formerly Knwon As Unitech Developers and Projects Pvt. Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Addi. CIT Spl. Range- 2, New Delhi

ITA 6847/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 3154/Del/2019 Candor Gurgaon One Realty Addl. CIT, 2015-15 Projects Private Limited, Spl Range-2, 1102, Tower B, 11th Floor, New Delhi Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN: AAACU8046K 4598/Del/2019 Addl. CIT, Candor Gurgaon One Realty 2015-16 Spl Range-2, Projects Private Limited, New Delhi 1005, Roots Tower, Plot No.7, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. PAN: A…

Candor Kolkata One Hi- Tech Structures Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra vs. ACIT Special Range-2, New Delhi

ITA 6664/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 3154/Del/2019 Candor Gurgaon One Realty Addl. CIT, 2015-15 Projects Private Limited, Spl Range-2, 1102, Tower B, 11th Floor, New Delhi Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN: AAACU8046K 4598/Del/2019 Addl. CIT, Candor Gurgaon One Realty 2015-16 Spl Range-2, Projects Private Limited, New Delhi 1005, Roots Tower, Plot No.7, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. PAN: A…

Addl. CIT, Range- 2, New Delhi vs. Candor Gurgaon One Realty Projects Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4598/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 3154/Del/2019 Candor Gurgaon One Realty Addl. CIT, 2015-15 Projects Private Limited, Spl Range-2, 1102, Tower B, 11th Floor, New Delhi Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. PAN: AAACU8046K 4598/Del/2019 Addl. CIT, Candor Gurgaon One Realty 2015-16 Spl Range-2, Projects Private Limited, New Delhi 1005, Roots Tower, Plot No.7, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, Delhi – 110 092. PAN: A…