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 367,154 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

M/S. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd., Gandhinagar vs. The Addl.CIT., Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 208/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R
Section 115Section 14A

…the expenses. Therefore the expenses incurred in relation to such income needs to be disallowed. The ld. DR in support of his claim extended his reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640. 8. We have heard the rival contention and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to the disallowance made by the Ld.CIT(A) for Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of the expenditure incurred in relation to exempted income. It is an undisputed fact that the Ld CIT-A made the disallowance on the ad-hoc basis. There…

M/S. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT., Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1170/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R
Section 115Section 14A

…the expenses. Therefore the expenses incurred in relation to such income needs to be disallowed. The ld. DR in support of his claim extended his reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640. 8. We have heard the rival contention and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to the disallowance made by the Ld.CIT(A) for Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of the expenditure incurred in relation to exempted income. It is an undisputed fact that the Ld CIT-A made the disallowance on the ad-hoc basis. There…

The Dcitgandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Gujarat Industrial Investment Corporation, Gandhinagar

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1115/AHD/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Kumar, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.R
Section 115Section 14A

…the expenses. Therefore the expenses incurred in relation to such income needs to be disallowed. The ld. DR in support of his claim extended his reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited Vs. CIT reported in 402 ITR 640. 8. We have heard the rival contention and perused the materials available on record. The issue in the instant case relates to the disallowance made by the Ld.CIT(A) for Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of the expenditure incurred in relation to exempted income. It is an undisputed fact that the Ld CIT-A made the disallowance on the ad-hoc basis. There…

Apeejay Shipping Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, this ground for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 2238/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…tisfied with the correctness of the computation of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, by the assessee. Once such satisfaction is not recorded, the propositions of law laid down in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v.Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) by the Hon’ble Supreme Court apply. 10. In view of the above discussion, we delete this disallowance made u/s 14A for the sole reason that the Assessing Officer failed to record any reason as to why he is not satisfied with the correctness of the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act. As we have upheld the contention…

Apeejay Shipping Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-9(1)Kol., Kolkata

In the result, this ground for both the assessment years are allowed

ITA 119/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…tisfied with the correctness of the computation of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, by the assessee. Once such satisfaction is not recorded, the propositions of law laid down in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v.Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) by the Hon’ble Supreme Court apply. 10. In view of the above discussion, we delete this disallowance made u/s 14A for the sole reason that the Assessing Officer failed to record any reason as to why he is not satisfied with the correctness of the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act. As we have upheld the contention…

Natesan Synchrocones Pvt. Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle-4(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2211/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2211/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, JCIT
Section 14ASection 40

…he Ld.counsel submitted that for the year under consideration also the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the claim of the assessee in the light of the judgment of Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640. Referring to another disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act to the extent of ₹7,12,604/-, the Ld.counsel submitted that since the main issue is to be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer, the disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act may also be remanded back to the Assessing Officer…

Robust Marketing Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 7(2), Mumbai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1238/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Sanjeev Joshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…onsidered opinion that for the purpose of computing disallowance u/s 14A, now it is immaterial whether the investments were held as investor or as stock-in- trade in the wake of recent decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [91 Taxmann.com 154] wherein the Hon’ble Court has upheld the above proposition. Therefore, the reliance on the aforesaid CBDT circular, in our opinion, could not help the assessee in any manner. 6. Proceeding further, upon perusal of financial statements as placed before us, we find that at year-end, the assessee’s Share Capital was mere Rs.1 Lacs as against…

M/S. Lakhani India Ltd., Faridabad vs. Addl.CIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the ld

ITA 3736/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Lakhani India Ltd, Circle-Ii, Block-B, Plot No. 131, New Cgo Complex, Nh-Iv, Nit, Sector-24, Faridabad Faridabad Pan: Aaacl3113G (Appellant) (Respondent) Lakhani India Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 131, Circle-Ii, Block-B, Sector-24, Faridabad New Cgo Complex, Nh-Iv, Pan: Aaacl3113G Nit, Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 14ASection 40

…act only issue involved is whether 0.5% of the average investment made by the assessee in these companies is required to be disallowed u/s 14 A of the income tax act or not. Such an contention has already been negatived by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of 402 ITR 640 holding that the first and foremost issue that falls for consideration is as to whether the dominant purpose test, which is pressed into service by the assessees would apply while interpreting section 14A or one has to go by the theory of apportionment. The dominant purpose for which the investment into shares is made by an assessee may not be re…

Sbi Capital Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2098/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Rajnikant Chaniyari, Ld. ARFor Respondent: V.K.Chaturvedi, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…s exist in the impugned AY except for the fact the no disallowance u/r 8D(2)(ii) has been made by the lower authorities. It is further noted that Hon’ble Supreme Court in a recent judgment, in group of cases titled as Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT [12/02/2018 91 Taxmann.com 154], has decided vital issues concerning disallowance u/s 14A, the benefit of which was not available to the lower authorities at the time of adjudicating this issue. Therefore, respectfully following the judgment of co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in earlier years and in the light of recent judgment by Hon’ble Supreme ITA.No.2098/Mum/201…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7241/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “L” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. CIT-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. PAN No. AAACM5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15th Vs. AayakarBhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. PAN No. AAACM5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. J.D.J. Mis…

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7133/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “L” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. CIT-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. PAN No. AAACM5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15th Vs. AayakarBhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. PAN No. AAACM5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. J.D.J. Mis…

ACIT 7(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Nsdl E Governance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2248/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Shri D.G. Pansari, DRFor Respondent: Shri Niraj D. Sheth, AR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “B” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री रसमत कोचर लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAMIT KOCHAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 2248/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Asst. Commissioner of NSDL E-Governance Income Tax-Circle 7(2)(2) Limited R.No. 623, 6th Floor, Aayakar 4th Floor, Trade World, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Kamala Mills Compd Lower 400 020 Parel, Mumbai-400 013 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAACN2082N…

DCIT 7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Phl Finvest P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2318/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2318/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax …… (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) Circle 7(3)(2), Room No. 669A, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-20 Vs. Phl Fininvest Pvt. Ltd. …… (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) Piramal Tower, Ganpatarao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-13 स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacn5024A अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Yogesh A Thar Ms. Manshi Padhiar, Ars’ ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23-08-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31-08-2018 Aadosa / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, DRFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh A Thar
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14A

…unsel for the assessee agreed that the relief granted by the CIT(A) as regards to the disallowance pertaining to investment in PGL shall be reversed in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). Accordingly, we allow the ground raised by the Revenue i.e. ground No. 2 in term of the investment made by the assessee in PGL to the extent of ₹ 5.16 crores. Accordingly, the interest expenses incurred by the assessee are to be disallowed. AO will recompute the disallowance accordingly. 7. The next disallowance pertaining to investment in…

Nerka Chemicals P. Ltd, Gujrat vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 38, Mumbai

In the result this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4423/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Accountant Mamber & Shri Pawan Singh

For Respondent: Sh. Girish Dave Special
Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 2(22)(a)Section 253Section 254(1)Section 28Section 56(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MAMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4585/Mum/2015(Assessment Year- 2010-11) Nerka Chemical Private Limited, Deputy Commissioner of Income 50-51, B-11, GIDC Estate, Vapi, tax, Central Circle-6(3), District Valsad, Gujarat, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. PIN - 396195 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN: AAACN9337Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. P.J. Pardiwala Sr. Advocate with : Sh. Jos Sinhgwi Advocate Sh.Kirit Kamdar-CA Revenue by : Sh. Girish Dave Special Counsel/ Advocate with Sh. Suman Kumar Sr. DR also as…

West Bengal Electronic Industries Development Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1982/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-1, Kolkata -Vs- M/S West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [Pan: Aaacw 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata -vs- M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1981&1982/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Department : Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT DR For the A…

West Bengal Electronic Industries Development Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1981/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-1, Kolkata -Vs- M/S West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [Pan: Aaacw 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata -vs- M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1981&1982/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Department : Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT DR For the A…

D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corporation Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1945/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Dcit, Circle-1, Kolkata -Vs- M/S West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [Pan: Aaacw 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri M.Balaganesh, AM & Hon’ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM] I.T.A No. 1945/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2008-09 DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata -vs- M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A Nos. 1981&1982/Kol/2013 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 M/s West Bengal Electronics Industry Development Corp. Ltd. -vs- DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata [PAN: AAACW 2411 Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Department : Shri Md. Usman, CIT DR Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT DR For the A…

M/S. Container Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 77/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rk Panda & And Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2010-11 M/S Container Corporation Acit, Circle 6(2) Vs. Of India Ltd. New Delhi Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A A.Y. 2010-11 Dcit, Circle 3(1) M/S Container Vs. New Delhi Corporation Of India Ltd. Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 32Section 80

…de to Ld.AO with a direction to recompute disallowance under section 14 A read with Rule 8D, having regard to recent decisions passed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd vs. CIT reported in (2018) 91 Taxmann.com 154. Page 17 of 25 ITA 77/Del/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 M/s Container Corpn. Of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1) & ITA186/Del/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 ACIT Circle 6(2) vs. M/s Container Corpn. Of India Ltd 14.2. Ld. CIT DR did not object to the issue being set aside to Ld. AO for recomputation in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Container Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by revenue stands dismissed

ITA 186/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rk Panda & And Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2010-11 M/S Container Corporation Acit, Circle 6(2) Vs. Of India Ltd. New Delhi Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A A.Y. 2010-11 Dcit, Circle 3(1) M/S Container Vs. New Delhi Corporation Of India Ltd. Concor Bhawan, C-3 Mathura Road, Opp. Apollo Hospital New Delhi 110 076 Pan: Aaacc1205A (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 32Section 80

…de to Ld.AO with a direction to recompute disallowance under section 14 A read with Rule 8D, having regard to recent decisions passed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court as well as Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd vs. CIT reported in (2018) 91 Taxmann.com 154. Page 17 of 25 ITA 77/Del/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 M/s Container Corpn. Of India Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1) & ITA186/Del/2015 A.Y. 2010-11 ACIT Circle 6(2) vs. M/s Container Corpn. Of India Ltd 14.2. Ld. CIT DR did not object to the issue being set aside to Ld. AO for recomputation in the light of the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Fern Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeals filed by revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 3682/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Smt Beena A Pillaiacit Vs. M/S Ranbaxy Health Care P Circle-15(1) Ltd. C.R.Building, I.P.Estate (Now M/S Fern Healthcare New Delhi P Ltd.) S-137, 2Nd Floor Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. M/S Fern Healthcare P Ltd. Circle-15(1) S-137, 2Nd Floor C.R.Building, I.P.Estate Greater Kailash Ii New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaccr3509E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Deepali Chandra, CIT, D.R
Section 10Section 14Section 14A

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ACIT Vs. M/s Ranbaxy Health Care P Circle-15(1) Ltd. C.R.Building, I.P.Estate (Now M/s Fern Healthcare New Delhi P Ltd.) S-137, 2nd Floor Greater Kailash II New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT Vs. M/s Fern Healthcare P Ltd. Circle-15(1) S-137, 2nd Floor C.R.Building, I.P.Estate Greater Kailash II New Delhi New Delhi PAN: AACCR3509E (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Ms.Deepali Chandra, CIT, D.R. Assessee by: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, Adv. Date of Hearing 02nd August, 2018 Da…