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 367,514 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

ACIT, Cir.-29, Kolkata vs. M/S Steel Authority of India Employees Co-Op. Cr. Society Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 258/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

…essee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who was pleased to hold as under: “I have examined the contention of the assessee and the assessee’s reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640 (SC). On a reading of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court, it is not discernible that any such view has been accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme court that the provisions of section 14A, read with Rule 8D are not applicable in the case of shares held as stock in trade. It is an admitted fact that dividend has been earned on shares and mutual fu…

Steel Authority of India Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.-28, Kolakta

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 428/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

…essee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who was pleased to hold as under: “I have examined the contention of the assessee and the assessee’s reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640 (SC). On a reading of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court, it is not discernible that any such view has been accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme court that the provisions of section 14A, read with Rule 8D are not applicable in the case of shares held as stock in trade. It is an admitted fact that dividend has been earned on shares and mutual fu…

Steel Authority of India Employees Co.Op. Credit Society Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.-28, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 427/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

…essee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who was pleased to hold as under: “I have examined the contention of the assessee and the assessee’s reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640 (SC). On a reading of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme court, it is not discernible that any such view has been accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme court that the provisions of section 14A, read with Rule 8D are not applicable in the case of shares held as stock in trade. It is an admitted fact that dividend has been earned on shares and mutual fu…

Suman P Khurana, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2415/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2415/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Suman P. Khurana बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-3(2) Room No.402, 4Th Floor, 501, Raheja Centre, Free Press Vs. Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Mumbai-400021. Karve Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.S स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahpk0190Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Shekhar Gupta Revenue By: Shri Hoshang B. Irani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 21.02.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -51, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Estimating The Annual Value Of The Property At Maker Chambers Iv, Nariman Point, Mumbai At Rs.82,86,301/- As Against Nil Declared By The Assessee & Denying The Exemption Claimed U/S 23(1)(C) By The Assessee. A.Y. 2012-13 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Estimating The Value Of The Property At Gujranwala Town, Delhi At Rs.6,60,000/- As Against Nil Declared By The Assessee & Denying The Exemption Claimed U/S 23(1)(C) By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…on of shares, when the shares held as stock-in-trade which arise if the assessee is engaged in the trading of shares. 10. In fact, this question had fallen for consideration in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 91 taxmann.com 154/254 Taxman 325/402 ITR 640 (SC), wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court considered two cases wherein the question of apportionment of expenditure had arisen and predominant intent of investment in 21 A.Y. 2012-13 shares was pleaded, though an different facts, on the ground that the objective of investing in shares was not to the dividend income, but to either retain controlling in…

The Dy. CIT., Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Gujarat Industries Power Co. Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

ITA 2463/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Convened through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 472/Ahd/2013, 535/Ahd/2014, 1257/Ahd/2015 A/w. CO No.111/Ahd/2015 & 2463/Ahd/2016 A/w. CO No.207/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2010-11,2011-12 & 2012-13) Gujarat Industries Power Deputy Commissioner of बनाम/ Co. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. P. O. Petrochemicals, Dist.- Circle-1(1), Baroda - 391346 Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodara "थायी लेखा सं./ज…

The DCIT, Circle-1(1), Vadodara vs. M/S. Gujarat Industries Power Co.Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

ITA 1257/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Convened through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 472/Ahd/2013, 535/Ahd/2014, 1257/Ahd/2015 A/w. CO No.111/Ahd/2015 & 2463/Ahd/2016 A/w. CO No.207/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2010-11,2011-12 & 2012-13) Gujarat Industries Power Deputy Commissioner of बनाम/ Co. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. P. O. Petrochemicals, Dist.- Circle-1(1), Baroda - 391346 Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodara "थायी लेखा सं./ज…

Gujarat Industries Power Co. Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

In the result, the captioned appeals are :

ITA 535/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 147Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD (Convened through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMEBR & SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 472/Ahd/2013, 535/Ahd/2014, 1257/Ahd/2015 A/w. CO No.111/Ahd/2015 & 2463/Ahd/2016 A/w. CO No.207/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10, 2010-11,2011-12 & 2012-13) Gujarat Industries Power Deputy Commissioner of बनाम/ Co. Ltd. Income Tax Vs. P. O. Petrochemicals, Dist.- Circle-1(1), Baroda - 391346 Aaykar Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodara "थायी लेखा सं./ज…

Shriram Credit Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1307/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 14A

…t by relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2015-16 in I.T.A. No. 1767/Chny/2019 dated 16.12.2019, wherein, the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). 3.4 On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has no power conferred upon him to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the assessee’s submission with reference to the assessment record and to delete the addition under section 14A of the Act. 3.5. We have heard both the sides, perused th…

DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1) (I/C), Chennai vs. Shriram Credit Company Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 1199/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 14A

…t by relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2015-16 in I.T.A. No. 1767/Chny/2019 dated 16.12.2019, wherein, the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). 3.4 On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has no power conferred upon him to remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the assessee’s submission with reference to the assessment record and to delete the addition under section 14A of the Act. 3.5. We have heard both the sides, perused th…

Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Large Tax Payer Unit-1, Mumbai

797/Mum/2018

ITA 1769/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2022AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 2(43)Section 37Section 40Section 90

…t proceed directly to apply the computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Income Tax Rules and make disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. This issue is also addressed by the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640. Hence, the disallowance made by the ld. AO u/s.14A of the Act has been rightly deleted by the ld. CIT(A) for want of recording of objective satisfaction with cogent reasons. Accordingly, the ground Nos. 2 & 3 raised by the Revenue for the A.Y.2012-13 are hereby dismissed. 9. The ground No.5 raised by the Revenue for the A.Y.2012-13 is challengi…

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai vs. ACIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3403/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.2908/मुं/2019 ("न.व .2015-16) The Acit 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. Pan: Aaacl-0582-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 3403/मुं/2019 ("न. व .2015-16) Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaacl-0582-H बनाम Vs. The Acit 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai – 400 02

For Appellant: Shri T. SankarFor Respondent: Shri Farrokh V. Irani
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 115OSection 14ASection 44

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ ए ” "ी "मोद कुमार, उपा"य" एवं "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.2908/मुं/2019 ("न.व .2015-16) The ACIT 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. PAN: AAACL-0582-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 3403/मुं/2019 ("न. व .2015-16) Life Insurance Corporation of Ind…

ACIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2908/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice- & Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं.2908/मुं/2019 ("न.व .2015-16) The Acit 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. Pan: Aaacl-0582-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 3403/मुं/2019 ("न. व .2015-16) Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aaacl-0582-H बनाम Vs. The Acit 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Mumbai – 400 02

For Appellant: Shri T. SankarFor Respondent: Shri Farrokh V. Irani
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 115OSection 14ASection 44

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “ ए ” "ी "मोद कुमार, उपा"य" एवं "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं.2908/मुं/2019 ("न.व .2015-16) The ACIT 3(2)(1), Room No.674, 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai – 400 020 बनाम Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 005. PAN: AAACL-0582-H ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 3403/मुं/2019 ("न. व .2015-16) Life Insurance Corporation of Ind…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Ltu-2, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2009-10

ITA 1580/MUM/2020[UNION BANK OF INDIA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyal

Section 14ASection 154Section 36(1)

…e in para 15 & 16 as under “15. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find that AO has withdrawn, the relief granted u/s. 14A in the assessment order by mentioning that subsequently order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. 402 ITR 640 has come. Accordingly, he has effectively made the disallowance us/.14A u/s 154 of the Act. We note that the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd (supra) did not overrule the proposition that when interest free funds are sufficient still disallowances u/s 8D(ii) needs to be done. Thus, the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Cou…

Mayank Jalan, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and for AY 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 360/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the Ld. C.I.T.(A) further erred in inferring on sheer misinterpretation that the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act on shares held as stock-in-trade is settled by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 without considering the clear distinction made in the said decision between the dividend earned on the shares acquired to retain the controlling interest in the investee company and the shares purchased for the purpose of liquidating when price goes up to make profit out of such trading, as in the case of the assessee. 3. That, the Ld. C.I.T.(A)…

Mayank Jalan, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 is partly allowed and for AY 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 359/KOL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the Ld. C.I.T.(A) further erred in inferring on sheer misinterpretation that the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act on shares held as stock-in-trade is settled by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 without considering the clear distinction made in the said decision between the dividend earned on the shares acquired to retain the controlling interest in the investee company and the shares purchased for the purpose of liquidating when price goes up to make profit out of such trading, as in the case of the assessee. 3. That, the Ld. C.I.T.(A)…

Hemant Kumar Ruia, Mumbai vs. ACIT-18(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 973/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Proceeding To Make Disallowance Under Rule 8D2((Ii) & (Iii)Of I.T. Rules, 1962. 1.2 In So Doing The Ld Cit (A'S) Did Not Follow The Principle Laid Down By The Apex Court In The Case Of Maxopp Investment Ltd. (2018) 91 Taxman.Com 154 (Sc) Of Apportionment Of Expenditure Between Income Liable To Tax & Income Which Is Exempt. 1.3 The Ld. Cit (A'S) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of Ao That Interest On Public Provident Fund Was Liable To Be Considered For The Purpose Of Computing Disallowance U/S 14Aof The Act. 1.4 In Any Event Of The Matter The Ld. Cit (A'S) Ought To Have Restricted The Disallowance To The Extent Of Rs. 62,977/- Being Dividend Received On Shares Held As Stock In Trade.

Section 14A

…record. I note that the assessee’s plea before the Assessing Officer that the assessee is trading in shares hence, no disallowance under section 14A should be done not sustainable on the touchstone of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (91 Taxmann.com 154). However, assessee’s plea that disallowance should be restricted to exempt income earned is sustainable. Accordingly I direct that the disallowance in this case should be restricted to exempt income earned. 3 Keval H. Seth 7. In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 01.04.2022.…

M/S Ahiliabai Sardessai, Panaji vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 379/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ons of Section 14A(2) and (3) read with Rule 8D of the Rules or a best judgment determination, as earlier prevailing, would become applicable.” Also a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the case before us, it is a matter of fact borne from the record that there is a failure on the part of the A.O, to record his dissatisfaction, that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, as were placed before him, it was not possible on his part to generate the requisite satisfaction with regard to the correctness of the assesse…

M/S Ahiliabai Sardessai, Panaji vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 378/PAN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ons of Section 14A(2) and (3) read with Rule 8D of the Rules or a best judgment determination, as earlier prevailing, would become applicable.” Also a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). In the case before us, it is a matter of fact borne from the record that there is a failure on the part of the A.O, to record his dissatisfaction, that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, as were placed before him, it was not possible on his part to generate the requisite satisfaction with regard to the correctness of the assesse…

ACIT Circle 1, Trichy vs. Dalmia Bharat Ltd., Trichy

In the result, appeal of the revenue being devoid of merits is dismissed

ITA 3156/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. M/S. Dalmia Dalmia Bharat Bharat Trichy Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu - Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu 621 651, Pan/Gir No.Aajcs 7366 K Aajcs 7366 K (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E Revenue By : Dr S.Palanikumar, Cit (Dr Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/3/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Dr S.Palanikumar, CIT (DR
Section 14A

…5 the assessee in para 7 of the impugned order, wherein, the assessee after submitting the factual details of the issue has relied on various judgments including the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others v. CIT' 247 ITR 162 and another judgment in the case of Priya Exhibitors Pvt Ltd. Vs ACIT (2012) 32 CCH 430 (Del, wherein, it was held that when the AO records a finding that he is not satisfied with the assessee’s claim, Rule 8D comes into play. Further, such satisfaction must be drawn after an objective analysis and for cogent reasons that the amount of such expen…

Kotak Securities Limited, Mumbai vs. Add. CIT Rnage 4(3) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6024/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Shri Shambhu Yadav
Section 14A

…o far as the nature of investments viz. strategic investments / stock-in-trade is concerned, we find that the controversy stood settled by the recent decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in group of cases titled as Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT [12/02/2018 91 Taxmann.com 154], wherein Hon’ble court has expressed the 7 ITA.NOs. 6023, 6024, 6256 & 6257/MUM/2019 M/s. Kotak Securities Ltd., view that the nature of investments would be of no relevance while computing disallowance u/s 14A. Therefore, the plea as raised by Ld. Sr. Counsel on these lines would also be of no help to the assessee. 4.6 However, in terms…