PCIT v. Punjab National Bank,\n

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DY COMM OF INCOME TAX 2(1) (1) , MUMBAI

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

DCIT CIR. 2(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT -2(1)(2), MUMBA

…that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-3, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under Section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

JT. CIT (OSD) -2(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

…that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48…

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

ACIT - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

…that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

…d that since the exempt income earning\nsecurities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of\nexpenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made.\n9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank,\n[2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal\nfiled by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the\ndisallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as\nunder:-\n\"15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the\ndisallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.17,48,9…

ACIT-3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA ( ERSTWHILE CORPORATION BANK), MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are partly allowed

Bench: Shri.B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

…as improper and observation of the Ld. CIT(A) is not on factual position. He fully relied on the impugned assessment order. Consistent with this principle, the Ld. AR relied on the judgment of the Hon’able Delhi High Court in the case of Punjab National Bank, 449 ITR 468 (Del), held whether where shares were held by assessee-bank as stock-in-trade and not as investment, main purpose was to trade in those shares and earn profits there from and therefore section 14A of the Act was not attracted and expenditure could not be disallowed. 7.2. We have carefully considered the submissions of the rival parties. In the c…

IL & FS FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CIRCLE-14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)

…ot. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee had strongly relied upon the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment vs. CIT (438 ITR 1). Secondly, judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Punjab National Bank, 449 ITR 468 and also that SLP filed by the Revenue has been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 6. The ld. D.R. submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court have clearly held that even shares held as stock in trade, the disallowance u/s. 14A get triggered and expenditure has to be apportioned for the purpose of disallowance u/s. 14A. 7. We find on perusal…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA ,MUMBAI vs. THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…tted that since the exempt income earning securities are held by it as stock in trade, therefore, disallowance of expenditure under section 14A of the Act cannot be made. 9. We find that while deciding a similar issue in PCIT v/s Punjab National Bank, [2022] 449 ITR 468 (Del.), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue and upheld the findings of the Tribunal in deleting the disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D, by observing as under:- “15. The Appellant in the present appeal has also challenged the deletion of the disallowance under rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs. 17,48,97,34…