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

DCIT, 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Securities Dealership Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 594/MUM/2019[2000-01]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2022AY 2000-01
For Appellant: Shri Krupa GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Dharmvir
Section 10(33)Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14A

…arising from shares held as stock in trade. Thus, AO has 5 A.Y.2000-01 demonstrated that there was causal connection between the expenditure incurred and the exempt income earned. Reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. (2018) 91 Taxmann.com 154 (SC). In the said decision, in Para.39, it has been held that the applicability of Sec.14A of the Act which is based on the theory of apportionment of expenditure between taxable and non- taxable income, as held in Walfort Shares and Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 192 Taxmann 211(SC), will be triggered even in cases where the shares are he…

ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi vs. Punjab & Sind Bank, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in State Bank of Patiala also fail, though law in this respect has been clarified herei...

ITA 631/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhary(Through Video Conferencing) Acit Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank Circle – 20(1) Ho-Accounts & Audit New Delhi Department, 1St Floor, 21-Rajendra Place, New Delhi – 110 008 Pan : Aaacp 1206 G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iv)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ACIT Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank Circle – 20(1) HO-Accounts & Audit New Delhi Department, 1st Floor, 21-Rajendra Place, New Delhi – 110 008 PAN : AAACP 1206 G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Vivek Gupta, C.A. Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 29.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 05.01.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 22.11.…

Dcm Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi

ITA 603/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Gupta, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Yagyasaini Kakkar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ture is warranted is supported by the following judicial pronouncements. • South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT, C.A. No. 9606/2011 decided on 09.09.2021 - Supreme Court • CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) • Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT & Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) • HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2017) 399 ITR 576(Del); • CIT v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 159 (Del); • CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del); CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 502 (Del.) • The Nashik Road Deolali Vyapar…

Addl.CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi vs. Dcm Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 183/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Gupta, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Yagyasaini Kakkar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ture is warranted is supported by the following judicial pronouncements. • South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT, C.A. No. 9606/2011 decided on 09.09.2021 - Supreme Court • CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) • Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT & Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) • HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2017) 399 ITR 576(Del); • CIT v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 159 (Del); • CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del); CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 502 (Del.) • The Nashik Road Deolali Vyapar…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram Ownership Trust, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly

ITA 320/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mr. R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: 09.12.2021
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(1)(a)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद%य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.320/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) The Deputy Commissioner of Income Vs M/s. Shriram Ownership Trust Shriram House, 3rd floor, Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-2(1), 4,Burkit Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-34. Chennai-600 017. PAN: AAGTS 2243H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Mr. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. M/S Suvarna Commercial Pvt Ltd

ITAT/65/2021HC Calcutta17 Dec 2021

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

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…

ITO-3(3)(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sp Ports P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1691/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash Singh (DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14A

…he main thrust of the appellant is that the appellant company has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration. Recently, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has given a landmark judgement on the section 14A in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd 91 Taxmann.com 154. The judgement is particularly relevant on the issues of strategic investment and stock in trade, while applying the provisions of section 14A. It is held that If expenditure is incurred on earning dividend income, that much of expenditure which |s attributable to dividend income has to be disallowed and cannot be treated as business expen…

63 Moons Technologies Ltd. (Formerly Known As Financial Technologies (India) Ltd.), Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cent. Cir. - 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 4775/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan A.KariaFor Respondent: Shri Vatsalya Saxena
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 40Section 92C

…Sub-section 2 of section 14A is very specific as to grounds on which method of the assessee can be rejected and those conditions for rejection are not satisfied in the present case. The assessee relies on judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Maxopp 402 ITR 640 (SC) that method cannot be lightly rejected. The assessee also relies on judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Bombay Stock Exchange Ltd (2020) 113 taxmann.com 303 (Bom), copy enclosed at page 667 to 672 of paper book 3.” 26. Without prejudice to the above submission, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has given following submission:- Witho…

Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt. Ltd, Jharsuguda vs. Principal CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 195/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.193/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Rawats-Balaji(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AABAR 9061 J TAN No. : BBNR01647 C AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.194/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s SBEPL-GRIL(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AAFAS 2639 R TAN No. : BBNS04348 B AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.195/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Asse…

M/S- Sbep-Gril(Joint Venture), Jharsuguda vs. Principal CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 194/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.193/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Rawats-Balaji(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AABAR 9061 J TAN No. : BBNR01647 C AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.194/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s SBEPL-GRIL(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AAFAS 2639 R TAN No. : BBNS04348 B AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.195/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Asse…

M/S- Rawat Balaji (Joint Venture), Jharsuguda vs. Prilncipal, CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 193/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ, कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.193/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s Rawats-Balaji(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AABAR 9061 J TAN No. : BBNR01647 C AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.194/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/s SBEPL-GRIL(JV), Vs Pr.CIT, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(RS), Dist : Jharsuguda PAN No. : AAFAS 2639 R TAN No. : BBNS04348 B AND आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.195/CTK/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Asse…

DCIT Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Tamilnadu Power Finance & Infrastructure Development Corpn Ltd., Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 659/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, (Addl.CIT)-Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, (Adv.)- Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ$वाल, लेखा सद" के सम& BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.659/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT- Corporate Circle 3(1) M/s. Tamilnadu Power Finance and Chennai. Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd., बनाम/ Tufidco-powerfin Tower, Vs. No.490/3-4, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. (थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAACT-2840-A (अपीलाथ,/Appellant) : (/0थ, / Responde…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Religare Finvest Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2559/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. T. Kipgan, CIT/DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT, Circle 21(1), vs. M/s. ReligareFinvest Ltd., New Delhi. D-3, P3B, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi. PAN :AAFCS6801H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate Ms. Somya Jain, C.A. Respondent by: Sh. T. Kipgan, CIT/DR Date of hearing: 07.12.2021 Date of order : 10 .12.2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by the order dated 08.03.2016 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-…

ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela vs. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 373/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)

…e. Ld A.R. has placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements: i) Sesa Goa Ltd vs JCIT, 60 sot 121 (Pan) ii) JK Investors Ltd vs ACIT (ITA No.7858/Mum/2011) iii) Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) iv) Maxopp Investment Ltd vs CIT, 402 ITR 640 (SC) v) DCIT vs Integrated Coal Mining Ltd (ITA No.1031/Kol/2017). 63. Furthermore, ld A.R. submitted that therefore, if the AO, having regards to the assessee is not satisfied with the amount of P a g e 48 | 62 ITA No.366/CTK/2018 C.O. No.01/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 the claim of the assessee, in respect of such expenditure in relatio…

Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)

…e. Ld A.R. has placed reliance on the following judicial pronouncements: i) Sesa Goa Ltd vs JCIT, 60 sot 121 (Pan) ii) JK Investors Ltd vs ACIT (ITA No.7858/Mum/2011) iii) Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) iv) Maxopp Investment Ltd vs CIT, 402 ITR 640 (SC) v) DCIT vs Integrated Coal Mining Ltd (ITA No.1031/Kol/2017). 63. Furthermore, ld A.R. submitted that therefore, if the AO, having regards to the assessee is not satisfied with the amount of P a g e 48 | 62 ITA No.366/CTK/2018 C.O. No.01/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 the claim of the assessee, in respect of such expenditure in relatio…

M/S Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 973/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chetan R., Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 M/s. Karnataka State Beverages Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Corporation Lt., of Income Tax, 4th Floor, TTMC Building, ‘A’ Block, Circle 4(1)(1), BMTC, Shanthinagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 027. PAN: AACCK 1421A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S.V. Ravishankar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Chetan R., Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 30.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 09.12.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, A…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1855/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri S. Najmi [CIT] – D. R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…nation of the amount of expenditure for earning the exempt income as formulated. This has been held so by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of HT Media Ltd. 399 ITR 576 (Del). Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC) has clarified this aspect in the following manner:- “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 w…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1329/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. RastogiFor Respondent: Shri S. Najmi [CIT] – D. R
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…nation of the amount of expenditure for earning the exempt income as formulated. This has been held so by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of HT Media Ltd. 399 ITR 576 (Del). Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC) has clarified this aspect in the following manner:- “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 w…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(2), Chennai vs. Hi-Tech Housing Projects Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1655/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1655/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dcit, Vs M/S. Hi-Tech Housing Corporate Circle – 2(2), Projects Pvt. Ltd., Chennai – 34. Old No.19, New No.32, Cathedral Garden Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Pan: Aaach 2527C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G.Johnson, Addl.Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2021

For Appellant: Shri G.Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: None
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…aggregate disallowance was at Rs.4,44,00,366/-. The CIT(A) deleted disallowance by stating that there was no exempt income and hence, there cannot be any disallowance. We also noted that now Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640, has held that once there is no exempt income, no disallowance can be made by invoking the provisions of section 14A r.w.r 8D of the Rules. Hence, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and the same is affirmed. The appeal of Revenue on this issue is dismissed. 4. The next issue in this appeal of Revenue is as regards to the order of CIT(A)…

Dy CIT, CC--1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Mahendra Brothers Exports P. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 127/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2021AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)

…e u/s.14A of the Act to the exempt income. 8. Aggrieved by this order, only Revenue is in appeal before us and assessee has not filed any appeal. 9. The law is now very well settled by this Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments reported in 402 ITR 640 that disallowance u/s.14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this regard. Accordingly, the ground No.6 raised by the Revenue for A.Y.2011- 12 is dismissed. 10. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. ITA No.1982/Mum/2020 – Assessee Appeal (A.Y.20…