PCIT v. Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

414 ITR 122High Court2019#1635 most cited

What is PCIT v. Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned, and only investments that have yielded or are capable of yielding exempt income are considered for Rule 8D computation. The Assessing Officer must record objective satisfaction before rejecting the assessee's disallowance and applying Rule 8D, a principle also applicable to Section 115JB.

69

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. Caraf Builders · 414 ITR 122 · Section 14A disallowance · Rule 8D · objective satisfaction · exempt income limit · investments not yielding exempt income · Section 115JB · book profit · Minimum Alternate Tax

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 14ASection 1962Section 143(3)Section 8DSection 115JBSection 250Section 37(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(3)section 36(i)(iii)section 36(i)(va)section 36(l)(iii)section 36(l)(va)section 36(l)section 14a(1)r&d expenditurestatutory duessection 270a(9)mat creditsection 14a(2)

Judgments citing PCIT v. Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Rockman Industries Limited

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 794/CHANDI/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

…income, no disallowance can be made." The Hon'ble Supreme Court has confirmed the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Court and the same case reported in 103 Taxman.com 325 in ITA no. 197/2018 dated 16/2/2018. (ii) PCIT v/s Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd, [2019] 414 ITR 122 (Del) (iii) PCIT v/s Mcdonald India P Ltd, [2019] 101 Taxman.com 86 (Del) (iv) PCIT v/s Vardhman Chemtech P Ltd, 261 Taxman 233 (P&H) (v) PCIT v/s GVK Project & Technical Services Ltd (2019), 106 Taxman.com 181 (SC) (vi) Biocon Ltd v DCIT (Karn), 431 ITR 326 Even no satisfaction has been recorded by the Ld. A.O. in establishing the 14. nexus borr…

DCIT Circle-4, Ludhiana vs. Rockman Industries Ltd, Ludhiana

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

…income, no disallowance can be made." The Hon'ble Supreme Court has confirmed the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Court and the same case reported in 103 Taxman.com 325 in ITA no. 197/2018 dated 16/2/2018. (ii) PCIT v/s Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd, [2019] 414 ITR 122 (Del) (iii) PCIT v/s Mcdonald India P Ltd, [2019] 101 Taxman.com 86 (Del) (iv) PCIT v/s Vardhman Chemtech P Ltd, 261 Taxman 233 (P&H) (v) PCIT v/s GVK Project & Technical Services Ltd (2019), 106 Taxman.com 181 (SC) (vi) Biocon Ltd v DCIT (Karn), 431 ITR 326 Even no satisfaction has been recorded by the Ld. A.O. in establishing the 14. nexus borr…

Prudent Agri Commodities India Pvt Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Special Range 7 New Delhi

ITA - 251 / 2024HC Delhi01 May 2024
Section 14A

…rt Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/03/2026 at 13:11:44 cannot exceed the exempt income as held by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Caraf Builders and Construction 414 ITR 122. The AO is directed to restrict the disallowance to the extent of exempt income of the revenue. 4. The aspect of whether it could constitute expenditure and was of criticality clearly appears to have been missed. The matter requires consideration. 5. We accordingly admit the instant appeal under the following questions of law:- A. W…

Brett Enterprises Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4207/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary: A.Y :2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sunil HirawatFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 115JSection 14A

…A is not called for when the assessee has not earned any exempt income. In support of this proposition, the Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decisions rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Caraf Builders & Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122 and PCIT vs. Oil Industries Development Board (2019)(103 taxmann.com325)(Delhi). The ld. A.R further submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has since upheld the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. M/s. Oil Industry Development Board (supra) by not admitting the SLP filed by the revenue. The ld.A.R further…

Bhartiya International Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2110/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 156Section 195Section 40

…on behalf of the assessee, no further disallowance under Section 14A is called for in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of Joint Investments P. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) and Pr.CIT vs. Caraf Builders and Constructions P. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122 (Del) (SLP dismissed by SC). It is well settled law that disallowance under Section 14A can be made only in respect of those investments which have yielded tax free income during the year as held in Caraf Builders (supra) and ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del). The AO is thus directed to delete the disallowance under Section 14A mad…

ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Deeksha Holding Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 9/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Acit Vs. M/S. Deeksha Holding Ltd. Circle – 7 (1) 26-27, Ground Floor, World New Delhi Trade Centre, Barakhamba Line, New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacd1703G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. T. James Singson, Cit Dr Respondent By Sh. U.N. Marwah, Ca Sh. Praveen Goel, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 28/11/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 13/02/2024 Order Per N. K. Billaiya, Am:

Section 14ASection 68

…hose investments were to be considered for computing average value of investments which yielded exempt income during assessment year. The same view was followed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Caraf Builders and Constructions Private Limited 414 ITR 122 and also in the case of ACB India Limited 374 ITR 108. Respectfully following the ratio laid by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court (supra) we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). This ground is also dismissed. 15. The third ground relates to the deletion of the addition of Rs.17583247/-. 16. The under lying fa…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 1227/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of H T Media Ltd referred s…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 1226/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of H T Media Ltd referred s…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 6512/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of H T Media Ltd referred s…

M/S. the Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 1629/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of H T Media Ltd referred s…

Cedar Infonet Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 3462/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act. 12. We find that such plea on behalf of the assessee is in consonance with the facts on record and the judicial view governing field. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PCIT v. Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122; Special I.T.A. No.3462/Del/2018 7 Bench in ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., 165 ITD 27 (SB) have stated that investments which have not yielded any exempt income cannot be taken into account for the purposes of calculating disallowance under Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1963. 12. In the light of submissions made, the…

Bhartiya International Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 2109/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 156

…o further disallowance under Section 14A is called for in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of Joint Investments P. Ltd. Vs. CIT, (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) and Pr.CIT I.T.A. No.2109/Del/2022 12 vs. Caraf Builders and Constructions P. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122 (Del) (SLP dismissed by SC). It is well settled law that disallowance under Section 14A can be made only in respect of those investments which have yielded tax free income during the year as held in Caraf Builders (supra) and ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del). The AO is thus directed to delete the disallowance under Section 14A mad…

Ansal Buildwell Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 1148/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2017-18 Ansal Buildwell Limited Vs. Acit 118, Uff, Prakash, Deep Circle-2 (2) Building, 7, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaaca2845E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22/12/2023 Order

Section 10Section 14Section 14A

…e carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the exempt income of the assessee is Rs.1615/- only, therefore, in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Caraf Builders and Construction 414 ITR 122 the disallowance should not exceed the exempt income. 11. The AO is accordingly directed to restrict the disallowance of Rs.1615/- only. 12. In so far the suo-moto disallowance of Rs.565962/- is concerned the coordinate Bench in the case of GMR Enterprises Private Limited (supra) following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the ca…

ACIT Spl. Range-7, New Delhi vs. Prudent-Agri Commodities Indai Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1741/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15 Acit Vs. Prudent – Agri Special Range-7 Commodities India Private New Delhi Limited Rnm Centre 68/2, Janpath, New Delhi Pan No.Aagcp9228E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr Dr Respondent By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Advocate Sh. Sumit Lalchandani, Advocate Sh. Tarun Chanana, Advocate Date Of Hearing: 11/12/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 14/12/2023 Order Per N. K. Billaiya, Am: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Preferred Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-25, New Delhi Dated 21.12.2018 Pertaining To A.Y.2014-15. 2. The Grievance Of The Revenue Is That The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Disallowance U/S.14A R.W.R 8D Amounting To Rs.26169440/-. The Revenue Is Also Aggrieved By The Deletion Of Rs.4960/- Being The Sum Deposited On Account Of Epf Not Paid On Or Before The Prescribed Due Date.

Section 10Section 10(35)Section 14A

…sallowance u/s. 14A cannot be ruled out. However, since the exempt income is Rs.5067645/-, therefore, the disallowance u/s.14A cannot exceed the exempt income as held by Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Caraf Builders and Construction 414 ITR 122. The AO is directed to restrict the disallowance to the extent of exempt income of the revenue. 18. Next issue is deletion of late deposit of EPF. This issue has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the Revenue in the case of Check Mate Services Pvt. Ltd. 448 ITR 518 hence the finding of the CIT(A) are reversed and the ground is…

Paliwal Infrastructure P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 19(1), New Delhi

Accordingly direct the AO to restrict the disallowance to Rs.4234/- only. The appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1840/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

Section 10(34)Section 14A

…mpt income u/s.10(34) of the Act being dividend on shares amounting to Rs.4234/-. It is the say of the Counsel that any disallowance u/s.14A should not exceed exempt income as held by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Caraf Builders and Constructions 414 ITR 122. 4. The DR could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the revenue. 5. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the dividend income claimed to be exempt is Rs.4234/-, therefore, the ratio laiddown by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi (supra) fairly apply on the facts of the case. We acc…

Yash Movers (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-7(2), Kol, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 601/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 68

…to the amount of exempt income received by the assessee. The case of the assessee finds support from the various judicial decisions: i) Joint Investment pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del) ii) PCIT vs. Caraf Builders & Constructions Pvt. Ltd. [2019] 414 ITR 122(Del) iii) PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 393 ITR 476 (Punjab & Hariyana) We note that the assessee has earned tax free income of Rs. 1,53,600/- and therefore the disallowance cannot exceed the said amount of exempt income. Accordingly we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to restrict the addition of Rs. 1,53,600/- . Cons…

DCIT, Centralcircle-1, New Delhi vs. Blue Coast Hotels Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2850/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2017-18]

For Appellant: Ms. Akansha Birla, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parmita M. Biswas, CIT- DR
Section 14A

…he authorities below. The undisputed fact is that total exempt income during the year under consideration is Rs. 99,693/-. Therefore, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Caraf Builders & Constructions [P] Ltd 414 ITR 122 squarely applies wherein the Hon'ble High Court has held that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income. We, therefore, decline to interfere. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No. 2850/DEL/2022 is dismissed. The order is pronounced in the open court on 12.06.2023. [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [N.K. BILLAI…

ITO - 11(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Sigrun Holdings Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A). Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 234/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2023AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Biswanath DasFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Singh
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(47)

…Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. We find that the CIT(A) has granted relief by placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -2 Vs. Caraf Builders & Constructions (P.) Ltd: [2019] 414 ITR 122 (Delhi)[13-11-2018]. We find that the Special Leave Petition preferred by the Revenue against the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order, dated 30/08/2019 reported in (2020) 268 Taxman 317 (SC). It has been held that disallowance under Section 14A of the Act cannot be exceed t…

DCIT, C-11(1), New Delhi vs. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40a

…peal is allowed and the matter is remitted to work out the tax effect to the AO who shall do so after giving due notice to the party. ” (emphasis supplied) To the similar effect are the following decisions: - PCIT v. Caraf Builders & Constructions (P.) Ltd.: 414 ITR 122 (Del) – SLP filed by the Department dismissed in SLP(C) No. 25130/2019 reported in 268 Taxman 317 - REI Agro Ltd vs. DCIT: 144 ITD 141 (Kol. Trib.) - Department appeal dismissed in CIT v. REI Agro Ltd.: I.T.A.TNo.220 of 2013 (Cal. HC) - ACIT v. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd.: 165 ITD 27 (Del) (SB) - Religare Enterprises Ltd. v. DCIT: 1549/Del/2014 (…

Hero Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee

ITA 3608/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Bansal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Jeetandra Kr. Kale, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D and upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) is to the extent of Rs. 1.78 crores (rounded of) which is much in excess of the exempt income earned. We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Caraf Builders & Construction Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122 (Del) has held that disallowance u/s. 14A cannot exceed exempt income of the relevant year. This position has also 7 ITA.Nos.3608 & 3607/Del./2018 M/s. Hero Corporate Service Pvt. Ltd. been upheld by various High Courts including Hon’ble Delhi High Court in various decisions. In view of the settled position of law that the disallowance u/s. 14A c…