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

Divya Shakti Trading Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5029/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri R.K.Panda & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2008-09 Dy.Cit Vs. M/S Divya Shakti Trading Services Ltd. Circle 10(1) (Now M/S Indiabulls Advisory Services Ltd.) New Delhi F 60, 2Nd Floor, Malhotra Building Cannaught Place New Delhi Pan: Aaccd4953E A.Y. 2008-09 M/S Divya Shakti Trading Services Dy.Cit Ltd. Vs. Circle 10(1) (Now M/S Indiabulls Advisory New Delhi Services Ltd.) New Delhi Pan: Aaccd4953E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: BENCH “B” : NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. 2008-09 Dy.CIT vs. M/s Divya Shakti Trading Services Ltd. Circle 10(1) (Now M/s Indiabulls Advisory Services Ltd.) New Delhi F 60, 2nd floor, Malhotra building Cannaught Place New Delhi PAN: AACCD4953E A.Y. 2008-09 M/s Divya Shakti Trading Services Dy.CIT Ltd. vs. Circle 10(1) (Now M/s Indiabulls Advisory New Delhi Services Ltd.) New Delhi PAN: AACCD4953E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Gautam Jain, Sh. Piyush Kr. Kamal, Advs & Sh.Lalit Mohan,…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ranbaxy Health Care Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeals filed by revenue for Assessment Year

ITA 3108/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

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…

ACIT, Ltu, Kolkata vs. M/S. Uco Bank, Kolkata

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

ITA 1615/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 40

…nnection with earning of tax free income was not disallowable u/s 14A of the Act. He submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its recent 4 5 ITA No.1615/Kol/2016 & CO No. 51 of 2018 Uco Bank, AY 2012-13 judgment in the case of Maxopp Investment LtdVs CIT (402 ITR 640) had considered the issue of disallowability of the expenditure incurred in the assessment of an assessee who derived exempt dividend income from shares held as stock-in-trade. Referring to the said judgment, the Ld. DR submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in principle upheld the Revenue’s contention that since even the dealer in shares enjoy…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5054/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F’’ New Delhi BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.3078/DEL/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.820/DEL/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 820/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F’’ New Delhi BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.3078/DEL/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.820/DEL/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3078/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Ms. Paramita Tripathi, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F’’ New Delhi BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.3078/DEL/2011 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assistant Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No.820/DEL/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Deputy Commissioner of vs. M/s. Puran Associates Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, Circle-14(1), 4th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, New Delhi. 10 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACP 0458J (…

ACIT, Noida vs. M/S. Jubilant Enpro P. Ltd., Noida

In the result appeal filed by Revenue stands dismissed and Cross Objection by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3485/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2010-11 Acit, Circle 1 Vs. M/S Jubilant Enpro P Ltd. Noida 201 301 Plot No.1-A Sector 16 A Noida 201 301 Pan: Aaace0653L

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 14ASection 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2010-11 ACIT, Circle 1 vs. M/s Jubilant Enpro P Ltd. Noida 201 301 Plot No.1-A Sector 16 A Noida 201 301 PAN: AAACE0653L Cross Objection No. 194/Del/2017 (In ITA No. 3485/Del/2014) AY: 2010-11 M/s Jubilant Enpro P Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle 1 Plot No.1-A Noida Sector 16 A Noida 201 301 PAN: AAACE0653L (Appellant) (Respondent) Department by : Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.D.R. Assessee by : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. & Sh. Aditya Vohra, Adv. Date of Hearing : 04th July, 2018…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Om Metal Infraproject Limited, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 759/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: The Hon’Ble Apex Court In Cit V/S M/S Sbbj In Slp (C) No. 16249/2014? (Ii) Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs. 44,02,000/- U/S 14A R.W.R 8D Of The I.T. Act When The Assessee Has

For Appellant: Shri B.V. Maheshwari (CA)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 115JSection 14A

…he Assessing Officer. 6. Before us, the ld DR has submitted that the predominant purpose of investment is not relevant for the purpose of disallowance U/s 14A of the Act as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Maxopp Investment Ltd. V/s CIT 402 ITR 640. The ld DR has submitted that the Assessing Officer has computed disallowance as per clause (ii) of Rule 8D, which provides disallowance equivalent to 1% of the average investment. ITA 759/JP/2018_ 5 7. On the other hand, the ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee’s own interest free fund comprising of share capital and reserve…

ITO, WD-44(2), Kolkata vs. M/S M. Prasad & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1159/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Aug 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: He Ao In Assessment Proceedings & Filed Books Of Account, Relevant Bills, Vouchers & Bank Statement. The Ao Determined The Assessed Income At Rs.65,85,920/- By Making The Following Additions Vide Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Act Dt. 23-03-2013:-

For Appellant: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl.CIT, ld.Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri P.J Bhide, FCA, ld.AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…sallowance. Relevant portion of which is reproduced herein below for better understanding:- “5. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its recent decision in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT reported in [2018] 91 Taxmann 154 (SC) dated 12.02.2018 had held that the provision of section 14A would be applicable even when the shares are held as stock-in-trade in view of the fact that the resultant dividend income earned would be exempt in any case. Hence, we hold that the applicability of provision of section 14A in respect of shares held as stock- in-trade has been s…

Elegant Marbles & Grani Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1018/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1018/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13)

For Appellant: Anuj Kisnadwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri DG Pansari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ead with Rule 8D(2) of the Rules is that the AO must be satisfied that the computation for disallowance made by assessee is incorrect in respect to expenses relatable to exempt income. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC), held as under: - ““41. Having regard to the language of Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory 6 of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance under Section 14A was not correct. It will be…

Dandavati Investment & Trading Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1202/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA.No.1202/Mum/2017 Dandvati Investments & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd Assessment Year-2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण“डी”"ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1202/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dandvati Investments & Deputy Commissioner of Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd Income Tax-1(3)(2) C/o Hindustan Dorr-Oliver Ltd Mumbai बनाम/ 5th Floor, The International Vs. 16, New Marine Lines Cross road No.1, Churchgate Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेख…

Sunidhi Securities & Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 737/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 737/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Hiro Rai, ARFor Respondent: Shri DG Pansari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D

…373478 Telephone Exposes 5266 ii.2.5% of dividend income 60361 Amount disallowed under section `14A 250839 5. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the recent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC), for the proposition that recording of satisfaction is necessary having reference to the accounts of the assessee that suo moto disallowance under section 14A by the assessee is incorrect. On the other hand, the learned sr. Departmental Representative, relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and…

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Radha Madhav Investment Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed to that extent

ITA 1028/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1028/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Radha Madhav Investments Limited Deputy Commissioner Of Income 11-A, Mittal Chambers Tax -3(3)(1) बनाम/ Dr. Rajni Patel Marg, Nariman Point Room No.609, 6Th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-4063-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Vijay Mehta, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.1028/Mum/2017 Radha Madhav Investments Limited Assessment Year-2013-14 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1028/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Radha Madhav Investments Limited Deputy Commissioner of Income 11-A, Mittal Chambers Tax -3(3)(1) बनाम/ Dr. Rajni Patel Marg, Nariman Point Room No.609, 6th Floor Vs. Mumbai-400 021 Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं…

Teletec Finsec India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, issue recalled by this Tribunal is set aside to Ld

ITA 2885/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2009-10 Teletec Finsec India (P) Ltd. Vs. Ito, Ward 16(2) A-60, Naraina Indl. Area New Delhi Phase I New Delhi 110 028 Pan: Aaact3720F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.D.R
Section 14Section 143(2)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2009-10 Teletec Finsec India (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward 16(2) A-60, Naraina Indl. Area New Delhi Phase I New Delhi 110 028 PAN: AAACT3720F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms.Deepashree Rao, C.A. Sh. Vibhu Gupta, C.A. Department by : Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.D.R Date of Hearing : 04th July, 2018 Date of Pronouncement: 24th July, 2018 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal filed by Assessee arises out of order dated 31.05…

ITO 14(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Magnolia Commodities Servives P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed

ITA 632/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jitendra Jain, AR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “I” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 632/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Income Tax Officer- M/s Magnolia Commodities 14(2)(2), Room No.453, 4 th Services Pvt. Ltd., Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Edelweiss House, Off.CST Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Road, Kalina, Santacruz Mumbai-400 020 (E), Mumbai-400 098 .. (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा…

DCIT 10(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Investment P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1178/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri V Vidhyadhar, DRFor Respondent: Shri Farooq Irani
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “G” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 1178/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2008-09) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 5879/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Asst. Commissioner of M/s Godrej Investment Ltd. Income Tax-10(2), Plant No.11, Pirojsha The Dy. Commissioner of Nagar, Eastern Express Income Tax-10(2), Highway, Vikhroli (E), Vs. Room No. 432, 4th Floor…

ACIT 10(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Investment Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5879/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri V Vidhyadhar, DRFor Respondent: Shri Farooq Irani
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “G” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री राजेश कुमार लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 1178/Mum/2013 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2008-09) Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 5879/Mum/2012 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2009-10) The Asst. Commissioner of M/s Godrej Investment Ltd. Income Tax-10(2), Plant No.11, Pirojsha The Dy. Commissioner of Nagar, Eastern Express Income Tax-10(2), Highway, Vikhroli (E), Vs. Room No. 432, 4th Floor…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jai Krishan Estate Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 4082/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N.K. Saini & Sh. Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Jai Krishan Estate Circle-3(1), C.R. Building, Developers (P) Ltd., New Delhi A-26, Friends Colony (East), New Delhi Pan :Aabcj2911R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. Ajay Agarwal, Ca & Sh. Saurabh Agarwal, Ca Date Of Hearing 09.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement 09.07.2018 Order Per Laliet Kumar, J.M.: The Present Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-V, New Delhi, Dated 22.04.2015, On The Following Two Effective Grounds: 1. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Interest Free Loan Advance Of Rs.1,18,42,528/- Given By The Assessee. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Rs.1,82,26,810/- Made U/S 14A R/W Rule 8D Of The Act.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36

…Del/2012, dt. 16.06.2017. Further, it was submitted that this aspect has duly been considered by the learned CIT(A) and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to relief on merit. He also relies on the following decision: 1. Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) 2. CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Delhi) 3. Judgement of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of DCIT Vs. Jindal Photo Limited in ITA No. 4539/Del/2010 7 4. Judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Hindustan Tin Works Limited in ITA No. 55/2009, dt. 13.052.2009. 5. Judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of…

M/S Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…or receivable during the relevant previous year.” Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Principal CIT vs. State Bank of Patiala (supra). Though the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640 (SC) held that the dominant purpose of investment is not relevant for the disallowance of expenditure under section 14A and upheld the rule of apportionment. However, the decisions of 5 M/s. Bhandri Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. Hon’ble High Courts on the point that when no dividend income or exempt income was earned during the year then no d…

DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Industrial Investment Bank of India, Kolkata

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

ITA 894/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A Nos. 1870, 1871 & 894/Kol/2017 Assessment Years : 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Industrial Investment Bank Of India [Pan: Aabci 0324 D] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Md. Usman, CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, FCA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

…visions of section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked on the assessee. 5.2. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 5.3. We have heard the rival submissions. We find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs CIT reported in 402 ITR 640 (SC) had held that provisions of section 14A of the Act are applicable even for investments held as stock in trade. Hence this issue is now settled and provisions of section 14A of the Act are to be applied in the instant case. We find that this tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in 144 ITD 141 (Kol Trib) had held that only those inves…