PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57

417 ITR 334High Court2019#1183 most cited

What is PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 authority for?

The Assessing Officer must establish a proximate nexus between the expenditure to be disallowed and the investments made. The Assessing Officer must record satisfaction before making disallowance under Section 14A and must not proceed on mere suspicion.

96

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v M/s Kesoram Industries · Section 14A · disallowance of expenditure · proximate nexus · investments · satisfaction of AO · Section 143(2) · Section 144B

Sections most often in play

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 148A

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 147(b)section 147(a)section 127(2)section 153c proceedingssection 131(1)third party informationsection 43casection 153a(1)(b)section 10bdeduction u/s 80ialive link

Judgments citing PCIT v. M/s. Kesoram Industries 57

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, Raipur

Accordingly the appeals filed by the revenue for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are dismissed and the cross-objection/Additional cross-objections filed by the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed ...

ITA 224/RPR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 223 & 224/Rpr/2019 Co Nos.27 & 28/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2020 Co No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 151

…it Petition(s) with the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay which had disposed off the same vide its order passed in WP No.141/2015 in the case of Sesa Sterlite Limited (formerly known as Sesa Goa Limited) & Ors Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom.). It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay had after exhaustive deliberations concluded that there was no information available with the A.O to form a bonafide “reason to believe” that the income of the respective companies chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was further observed by the Hon’ble High…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Raipur vs. Bagadiya Brothers Private Limited, Raipur

Accordingly the appeals filed by the revenue for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are dismissed and the cross-objection/Additional cross-objections filed by the assessee for A.Y.2010-11 & 2011-12 are allowed ...

ITA 223/RPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 223 & 224/Rpr/2019 Co Nos.27 & 28/Rpr/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 75/Rpr/2020 Co No. 02/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Bagadiya Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Bagadiya Mansion, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aabcb8934G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 151

…it Petition(s) with the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay which had disposed off the same vide its order passed in WP No.141/2015 in the case of Sesa Sterlite Limited (formerly known as Sesa Goa Limited) & Ors Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom.). It was observed by the CIT(Appeals) that the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay had after exhaustive deliberations concluded that there was no information available with the A.O to form a bonafide “reason to believe” that the income of the respective companies chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. It was further observed by the Hon’ble High…

Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

ITA 495/KOL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43B

…ture of the loan taken by the assessee for purchasing the shares/making the investment in shares is to be examined by the Assessing Officer.” [emphasis added] 15.8. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in Kesoram Industries Ltd. vs. PCIT [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal), the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was pleased to hold as follows: “6. Two important issues have been pointed out in the aforementioned decision. Firstly that the provisions of section 14A has to be interpreted, particularly, the words that "in relation to the income" that does not form part of total income. Therefore, it was held that the pr…

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

ITA 494/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43B

…ture of the loan taken by the assessee for purchasing the shares/making the investment in shares is to be examined by the Assessing Officer.” [emphasis added] 15.8. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in Kesoram Industries Ltd. vs. PCIT [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal), the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was pleased to hold as follows: “6. Two important issues have been pointed out in the aforementioned decision. Firstly that the provisions of section 14A has to be interpreted, particularly, the words that "in relation to the income" that does not form part of total income. Therefore, it was held that the pr…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

ITA 2112/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43B

…ture of the loan taken by the assessee for purchasing the shares/making the investment in shares is to be examined by the Assessing Officer.” [emphasis added] 15.8. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in Kesoram Industries Ltd. vs. PCIT [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal), the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was pleased to hold as follows: “6. Two important issues have been pointed out in the aforementioned decision. Firstly that the provisions of section 14A has to be interpreted, particularly, the words that "in relation to the income" that does not form part of total income. Therefore, it was held that the pr…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2011-12 &

ITA 2111/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43B

…ture of the loan taken by the assessee for purchasing the shares/making the investment in shares is to be examined by the Assessing Officer.” [emphasis added] 15.8. Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that in Kesoram Industries Ltd. vs. PCIT [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal), the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court was pleased to hold as follows: “6. Two important issues have been pointed out in the aforementioned decision. Firstly that the provisions of section 14A has to be interpreted, particularly, the words that "in relation to the income" that does not form part of total income. Therefore, it was held that the pr…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit) Kolkata vs. M/S Century Plyboards (I) Ltd

ITA/65/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…ut that the assessee has to make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The dec…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit), Kolkata vs. M/S. Century Plyboards (I) Ltd

ITA/159/2018HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…ut that the assessee has to make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The dec…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Tax Payers Unit) Kolkata vs. Century Plyboards (India) Ltd

ITA/39/2021HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 14ASection 260ASection 80I

…ut that the assessee has to make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a 1 [2022] 441 ITR 648 (Cal) 2 [2018] 402 ITR 640(SC) Page 11 of 12 claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Officer that the claim made by the assessee cannot be accepted, the Assessing Officer can then proceed to apply computation mode as provided in rule 8D(2) of the Rules.” 14. The dec…

Kirloskar Pneumatic Co.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 983/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.983/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd., The Dcit, Circle-14, Hadapsar Industrial Estate, Vs Pune. Pune Solapur Road, Hadapsar, Pune – 411013. Pan:Aaack 2479 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri C.H.Naniwadeker – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 13/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Namely Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune Dated 09.04.2018 Emanating From The Order Of Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-14, Pune Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding Disallowance Of Rs.57,44,010/- U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D Without Appreciating The Facts & Submissions Made In This Behalf. He Also Failed To Appreciate That Before Invoking Rule 8D, The A.O. Has Not Recorded His Satisfaction As Required By Law. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding 50% Ad-Hoc Disallowance Of Gift & Present Of Rs.16,06,635/- U/S

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.983/PUN/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd., The DCIT, Circle-14, Hadapsar Industrial Estate, Vs Pune. Pune Solapur Road, Hadapsar, PUne – 411013. PAN:AAACK 2479 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri C.H.Naniwadeker – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 13/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 12/09/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Asansol Kolkata vs. Rajesh Jhunjhunwala

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/26/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata vs. Shri Mahendra Kumar Periwal

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/136/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Siliguri vs. Sri Satya Narayan Saria

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/168/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Kolkata vs. Jemish Shah

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/57/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Mukesh Saraogi (HUF)

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/76/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-12, Kolkata vs. Mukta Agarwal

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/44/2020HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Burdwan vs. Bijaya Tah

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/122/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Siliguri vs. Prakasho Devi Saria

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/138/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-1, Kolkata vs. Krishna Kumar Parsuramka

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/130/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Asansol Kolkata vs. Rakesh Jhunjhunwala

In the result, these appeals are allowed and the substantial

ITAT/27/2021HC Calcutta14 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA

…me Tax Versus JN Morison India 366 ITR which was referred to by the learned tribunal. For the same proposition reference was made to the decision in PCIT Versus M/s. Kesoram Industries 57 (2019) 417 ITR 334 (Bom) 58 361 ITR 162 59 (2019) 418 ITR 315 (SC) ITAT NO. 06 OF 2022 AND ETC. BATCH Page 61 of 150 Limited 60. Nextly, the learned senior counsel elaborately referred to the order passed by the tribunal, impugned before us and submitted that elaborate discussion on the facts has been done, the learned tribunal rightly held that there i…