Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT

THRRILL PARK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -APPEALS, DELHI

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 316/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Vs. Income Tax Department, National E-Assessment Centre, Thrrill Park Limited 9th Floor, Lotus Business Park, New Link Road, Andheri West, Mumbai 400053. (Appellant) Assessee by Revenue by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 11(3)1 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400020. PAN/GIR No. AACCT7914M (Respondent) Shri. Mahesh O. Rajora Shri. P.D. Chougule (Addl. CIT) SR 21/05/2024 27/05/2024 आदेश / O R DER PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M)…

DCIT, CIRCLE- 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

…f the Act, we find that assessee has suo moto disallowed ₹9,60,000/-, whereas exempt income earned by the assessee is merely ₹4,60,006/-, the learned CIT (A) has correctly deleted the disallowance following the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional high court in 421 ITR 142. Thus, the learned CIT (A)‟s order deleting the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act is upheld and ground no. 3 and 4 of the appeal is dismissed. 028. Accordingly, ITA No.1136/M/2023 of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed. 029. In co No 61/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15, assessee has challenged the order of the ld CIT [A] for…

ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BUSINESSMATCH SERVICES (INDIA) PVT LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly, ITA number 2455/M/2023 for assessment year 2017 – 18 filed by the assessing officer is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Jm & Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am

…f the Act, we find that assessee has suo moto disallowed ₹9,60,000/-, whereas exempt income earned by the assessee is merely ₹4,60,006/-, the learned CIT (A) has correctly deleted the disallowance following the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional high court in 421 ITR 142. Thus, the learned CIT (A)‟s order deleting the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act is upheld and ground no. 3 and 4 of the appeal is dismissed. 028. Accordingly, ITA No.1136/M/2023 of the learned Assessing Officer is dismissed. 029. In co No 61/M/2023 for assessment year 2014 – 15, assessee has challenged the order of the ld CIT [A] for…

DCIT-5(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. JSW INVESTMENTS PVT LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

…022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). On the proposition that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 421 ITR 142 (Bom) and the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case Pr.CIT Vs. Shalimar Pettel Feeds Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 547 P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1085 to 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) (Cal) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. HSBC Investment Direct (I) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom). Regarding contention of…

DCIT-5(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. JSW INVESTMENTS PVT LTD. , MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

…022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). On the proposition that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 421 ITR 142 (Bom) and the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case Pr.CIT Vs. Shalimar Pettel Feeds Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 547 P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1085 to 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) (Cal) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. HSBC Investment Direct (I) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom). Regarding contention of…

JSW INVESTMENTS PVT LTD. ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-10, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

…022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). On the proposition that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 421 ITR 142 (Bom) and the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case Pr.CIT Vs. Shalimar Pettel Feeds Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 547 P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1085 to 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) (Cal) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. HSBC Investment Direct (I) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom). Regarding contention of…

JSW INVESTMENTS PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. CIT, (A)-10, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

…022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). On the proposition that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income the ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2020) 421 ITR 142 (Bom) and the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case Pr.CIT Vs. Shalimar Pettel Feeds Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 547 P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1085 to 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) (Cal) and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT Vs. HSBC Investment Direct (I) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom). Regarding contention of…

DCIT- CC- 7 (1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE GLOBAL TRADEFIN LTD., MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dcit, Central Circle 7(1) Shree Global Tradefin Ltd. Mumbai 35, Ashok Chambers, Vs. Broach Street, Devji Ratansey Marg, Mumbai-400 009 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb 2975 J (Revenue) : (Assessee)

…mat charges, which ought to have been considered by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR further stated that the expenditure for the purpose of section 14A should be restricted to the exempt income and relied on the decision of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT [2020] 421 ITR 142 (Bom). The ld. AR further stated that the amendment to the provision is prospective in nature and the same was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT (Central) v. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. [2022] 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). The ld. AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd.…

ACIT CENT. CIR 5(40, MUMBAI vs. M/S. WADHWA GROUP HOLDINGS PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18 The Asstt. Commissioner M/S. Wadhwa Group Of Income Tax, Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 5(4), 301 Platina, Room No.1927, 19Th Floor, Plot C-59, Vs. Air India Building, G Block, Nariman Point, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400021 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 098 Pan: Aaccv3961G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Asstt. Commissioner M/s. Wadhwa Group of Income Tax, Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle – 5(4), 301 Platina, Room No.1927, 19th Floor, Plot C-59, Vs. Air India Building, G Block, Nariman Point, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400021 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 098 PAN: AACCV3961G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Mahesh O. Rajora, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Kishor Dhule, D.R. Date of Hearing : 21 . 06 . 2022 Date of Pron…

DCIT 13(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S WALL STREET FINANCE LTD , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…icer. 18. On the other hand, the learned Counsel submitted that this issue has been decided in favour of the tax payer by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s HDFC Bank Ltd., [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT, [2020] 421 ITR 142 (Bom.). 19. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra) held that where assessee’s own funds and other non–interest bearing funds were more than the investment in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A of the Ac…

DY CIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. MEP INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPERS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Mrs. Diva Singh & Shri Rifaur Rahmandy.Cit, Circle-7(1)(1), Room No. 126, 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ............ Appellant Vs. M/S. Mep Infrastructure Developers Ltd. 410, Boomerang, Chandivali Farm Road, Andheri East, Mumbai-400072. Pan: Aadcm3650J ............ Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Kishore Dhule, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Ms. Tejal Saraf (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 24/11/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/11/2021 Hearing Via Webex Order Per Diva Singh, J.M: In The Facts Of The Present Case, It Is Seen That The Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Toll Collection As Per The Contract Entered With Various Authorities & Also In Providing Road, Repair & Maintenance Service To Its Subsidiaries Companies. 2. For The Purposes Of Addressing The Issues Necessitating Adjudication, It Is Necessary To First Address The Fact That The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue, Wherein The Correctness Of The Order Dated 27.01.2021 Passed

…he Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pragati Krishna Gramin bank Vs. JCIT (2018) 256 Taxman 349 (Kar) (HC), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Pr.CIT Vs. HSBC Invest Direct (India) Ltd. 421 ITR 125 (Bom) and Nirved Traders (P) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 142 and of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. he restricted the disallowance to Rs. 1,68,580/-. 9. Aggrieved by this the Revenue is in appeal before the ITAT. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On a consideration thereof, we note that there is no dispute on facts an…

DCIT CIRCLE-6(3), MUMBAI vs. SKIL INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Justice P P Bhatt & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Dcit Circle-6(3) Vs. M/S. Skil Infrastructure Mumbai Ltd., Room No.1925, 19Th Floor Skill House, 209, Air India Building Bank Street Nariman Point Cross Lane, Fort Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 023 Maharashtra Pan/Gir No. Aabcs7689F (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…f Rs.1,42,400/- and hence, this decision is not at all applicable to the facts of the assessee. 5.1. Per contra, the ld. AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 421 ITR 142 wherein the impugned issue before us had been duly addressed in favour of the assessee. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the said case had categorically held that disallowance u/s.14A of the Act r.w.r. 8D of the Rules cannot exceed exempt income at all. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, we do no…