PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala

391 ITR 218High Court2017#392 most cited

What is PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala authority for?

Income from shares and securities held by banks as stock-in-trade constitutes business income, hence Section 14A disallowance is not attracted. Further, any disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year.

228

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala · Section 14A disallowance · shares and securities held by bank · stock-in-trade · income from securities business income · disallowance under Section 14A limit · disallowance cannot exceed exempt income · Rule 8D application disallowance · Supreme Court dismissal of SLP · 391 ITR 218

Also reported as

78 Taxmann.com 3259 Taxmann 315

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 115JBSection 8DSection 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 143(3)Section 90Section 91
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 43dsection 36(2)(v)section 36(1)(viii)section 10(34)section 36(1)(viia)interest on securitiessection 36(2)prohibited by lawdisallowance under section 14asection 129section 115jb(2)section 36(1)(vii)

Judgments citing PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala

Bharat Jayantilal Patel, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7189/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri V.G.GindeFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Bist
Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "एच” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.7189/MUM/2011, (A.Y : 2008-09) ITA NO.2111/MUM/2015, (A.Y : 2009-10) ITA NO.2112/MUM/2015, (A.Y : 2010-11) Shri Bharat Jayantilal Patel Vs. DCIT RG 4(1)(1) 3-3A, Churchgate House 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan 32/34, Veer Nariman Road M.K.Road Mumbai – 400 001 Churchgate Mumbai – 400 020 PAN : AAAPP6652R (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से /Appellant by : Shri V.G.Ginde प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से…

Ajmera Associates Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2673/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण " जी ” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2673/MUM/2015, (A.Y : 2010-11) M/s Ajmera Associates Ltd. Vs. DCIT Range 4(1) 63/67, Carmello Building Aayakar Bhavan Pathkwadi, Opp.G.T.Hospital M.K.Road L.T.Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 002 PAN : AADCA7062J (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Ms. Dinkle Hariya अपीलार्थी की ओर से /Appellant by : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Rajat Mittal सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 22/02/2017 घ…

Easun Products of India Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as assessee are dismissed

ITA 144/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Nov 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 182/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Easun Products Of India (P) Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. 6Th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Corporate Circle 2(1), Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaace7384C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 144/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 M/S. Easun Products Of India (P) Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Vs. Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri G.N. Raghavendra Rao, Jcit Assessee By : Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai Dated 16.12.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. Vide Order In M.P. Nos. 170 & 177/Chny/2017

For Appellant: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G.N. Raghavendra Rao, JCIT
Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद" एवं "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Shri Abraham P. George, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 182/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Easun Products of India (P) Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. 6th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Corporate Circle 2(1), Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE7384C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 144/Chny/2016 िनध…

Allahabad Bank, Kolkata vs. Add.CIT, Range-6, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1199/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2008-09 Allahabad Bank -versus- Addl. C.I.T., Range-6, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AACCA8464F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-6, , -versus- Allahabad Bank Kolkata Kolkata (PAN: AACCA8464F) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCA For the Department : Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 18.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 01.06.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: ITA No.1199/Ko…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Easun Products of India (P) Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as assessee are dismissed

ITA 182/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 May 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 182/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Easun Products Of India (P) Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. 6Th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Corporate Circle 2(1), Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaace7384C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 144/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 M/S. Easun Products Of India (P) Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 6Th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Income Tax, Corporate Circle 2(1), Vs. Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri G.N. Raghavendra Rao, Jcit Assessee By : Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A. सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 6, Chennai Dated 16.12.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. Vide Order In M.P. Nos. 170 & 177/Chny/2017

For Appellant: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G.N. Raghavendra Rao, JCIT
Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद" एवं "ी धु"ु" आर.एल रे"ी, "ाियक सद" के सम" Before Shri Abraham P. George, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 182/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Assistant Commissioner of M/s. Easun Products of India (P) Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. 6th Floor, Temple Tower, 672, Anna Corporate Circle 2(1), Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [PAN:AAACE7384C] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 144/Chny/2016 िनध…

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

ITTA/97/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Vijaya Bank, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 653/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan and Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Yadav, CIT-III (DR)
Section 36(1)(viia)

…sum of Rs.7,45,51,455 whereas the claim for deduction actually made u/s.36(1)(viia) of the Act was a sum of Rs.200,03,24,219/-. The AO was of the view that as laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala Vs. CIT 272 ITR 53 (P & H), claim for deduction u/s.36(1)(viia) of the Act cannot be greater than the amount debited to the profit and loss account as provision. The AO ITA Nos. 578 & 653/Bang/2012 Page 4 of 49 therefore proposed to disallowed a sum of Rs. 192,57,72,764/- (Difference between Rs.200,03,24,219 and Rs.7,45,51,455). The CIT(A) deleted the addition ma…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Vijaya Bank, Bangalore

In the result the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 578/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan and Smt.Lalitha Rameswaran, CAsFor Respondent: Shri O.P.Yadav, CIT-III (DR)
Section 36(1)(viia)

…sum of Rs.7,45,51,455 whereas the claim for deduction actually made u/s.36(1)(viia) of the Act was a sum of Rs.200,03,24,219/-. The AO was of the view that as laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala Vs. CIT 272 ITR 53 (P & H), claim for deduction u/s.36(1)(viia) of the Act cannot be greater than the amount debited to the profit and loss account as provision. The AO ITA Nos. 578 & 653/Bang/2012 Page 4 of 49 therefore proposed to disallowed a sum of Rs. 192,57,72,764/- (Difference between Rs.200,03,24,219 and Rs.7,45,51,455). The CIT(A) deleted the addition ma…