Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

402 ITR 640Supreme Court of India2018#21 most cited

What is Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

1,596

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maxopp Investment Ltd v CIT · Maxopp SC 2018 · Section 14A disallowance · Rule 8D application · expenditure for exempt income · only dividend bearing investments · satisfaction Section 14A(2) · strategic investment disallowance · disallowance not automatic · 402 ITR 640

Also reported as

91 Taxmann.com 154254 Taxmann 325301 CTR 489

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 37(1)Section 1961Section 250Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(1)section 14a(2)strategic investmentdisallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 10(34)section 14asection 36(1)(vii)section 40a(2)enduring benefitbook profitssection 115j

Judgments citing Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Ciba India Ltd ( Through Their Succesors Basf India Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 8(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 759/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2007-08 Ciba India Limited (Through Addl. Cit, Their Successors Basf India Circle-8(1), बनाम/ Ltd.), 1St Floor, Vibgyor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Towers, Unit No.101, M.K. Road, Plot No.C-62, G-Block, Mumbai-400020 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 Pan No. Aaccr3698A (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 5. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt.Anitha Sanghi

ITTA/97/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla Suresh Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4476/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4475/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4366/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5303/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5302/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Suresh K Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 3053/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

DCIT 4(2), Mumbai vs. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 2469/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Suresh K. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5442/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT Cir-4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Vimla S. Jajoo, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5441/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

Khandelwal Estate P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4171/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5215 & 5521/M/2010, Ita No.5492/M/2011 & "नधा"रण वष" M/S. Khandelwal Estates Pvt. Acit 10(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Sani Arma, Mumbai -400 020 बनाम/Vs. Raut Lane, बनाम बनाम बनाम Near Isckon Temple, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 049 Pan: Aaack2613E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 16. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

Khandelwal Estate (P) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5492/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5215 & 5521/M/2010, Ita No.5492/M/2011 & "नधा"रण वष" M/S. Khandelwal Estates Pvt. Acit 10(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Sani Arma, Mumbai -400 020 बनाम/Vs. Raut Lane, बनाम बनाम बनाम Near Isckon Temple, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 049 Pan: Aaack2613E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 16. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Khandelwal Estate P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5521/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5215 & 5521/M/2010, Ita No.5492/M/2011 & "नधा"रण वष" M/S. Khandelwal Estates Pvt. Acit 10(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Sani Arma, Mumbai -400 020 बनाम/Vs. Raut Lane, बनाम बनाम बनाम Near Isckon Temple, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 049 Pan: Aaack2613E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 16. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Khandelwal Estate P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5520/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5215 & 5521/M/2010, Ita No.5492/M/2011 & "नधा"रण वष" M/S. Khandelwal Estates Pvt. Acit 10(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Sani Arma, Mumbai -400 020 बनाम/Vs. Raut Lane, बनाम बनाम बनाम Near Isckon Temple, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 049 Pan: Aaack2613E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 16. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

Khandelwal Estates P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5215/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.5215 & 5521/M/2010, Ita No.5492/M/2011 & "नधा"रण वष" M/S. Khandelwal Estates Pvt. Acit 10(1), Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Sani Arma, Mumbai -400 020 बनाम/Vs. Raut Lane, बनाम बनाम बनाम Near Isckon Temple, Juhu, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400 049 Pan: Aaack2613E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 16. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…