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

Mega Engineers & Builders, Port Blair vs. DCIT, Cir. 3(2), Port Blair

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 312/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 194C

…find merit in the Ld. AR's submissions that in the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court also extensively dealt with the Revenue's appeal in the case of State Bank of Patiala arising from the decision of the Hori'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court reported in 391 ITR 218. In the said judgment the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court had taken note of the fact that the banking companies in the course of carrying on their banking business were required to hold shares & securities and the expenses were incurred in connection with such banking business and the income therefrom was assessable under the head "Profits &…

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Union of Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 1819/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am, Ι.Τ.Α. No.1440/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 2 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1819/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit-3(4) 29Th Floor, Centre-1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) Vs. M/S Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1441/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 1 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) 2

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 144Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

…red dividend, those shares are held by the assessee, though the intention of the assessee is to trade in shares to earn profits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the order of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala, 391 ITR 218 albiet for a different reason that provisions of section 14A would not get attracted where the shares are held in 'stock-in-trade', Following the judgment rendered in the case of Maxopp Investment P. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT vs. UCO Bank (supra), Punjab National Bank vs. ACI (supra) and IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT(supra) ha…

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Union of Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 1818/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am, Ι.Τ.Α. No.1440/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 2 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1819/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit-3(4) 29Th Floor, Centre-1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Vs. M/S Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1441/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 1 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) 2

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 144Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

…red dividend, those shares are held by the assessee, though the intention of the assessee is to trade in shares to earn profits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the order of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala, 391 ITR 218 albiet for a different reason that provisions of section 14A would not get attracted where the shares are held in 'stock-in-trade', Following the judgment rendered in the case of Maxopp Investment P. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT vs. UCO Bank (supra), Punjab National Bank vs. ACI (supra) and IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT(supra) ha…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir - (Ltu)-2, Mumbai

ITA 1441/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am, Ι.Τ.Α. No.1440/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 2 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1819/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit-3(4) 29Th Floor, Centre-1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Vs. M/S Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1441/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 1 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) 2

Section 115JSection 144Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

…red dividend, those shares are held by the assessee, though the intention of the assessee is to trade in shares to earn profits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the order of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala, 391 ITR 218 albiet for a different reason that provisions of section 14A would not get attracted where the shares are held in 'stock-in-trade', Following the judgment rendered in the case of Maxopp Investment P. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT vs. UCO Bank (supra), Punjab National Bank vs. ACI (supra) and IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT(supra) ha…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Cir - (Ltu)-2, Mumbai

ITA 1440/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Shri Ms Padmavathy S, Am, Ι.Τ.Α. No.1440/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 2 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1819/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Dcit-3(4) 29Th Floor, Centre-1, World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Vs. M/S Union Bank Of India, Central Accounts Dept., 6Th Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Appellant) : Respondent) Ι.Τ.Α. No.1441/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S Union Bank Of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Pan : Aaacu0564G Dcit, Circle-(Ltu) 1 29Th Floor, World Trade Centre, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400005. Appellant) : Respondent) 2

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 144Section 14ASection 36(1)(viii)

…red dividend, those shares are held by the assessee, though the intention of the assessee is to trade in shares to earn profits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court approved the order of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala, 391 ITR 218 albiet for a different reason that provisions of section 14A would not get attracted where the shares are held in 'stock-in-trade', Following the judgment rendered in the case of Maxopp Investment P. Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal in the case of Asstt.CIT vs. UCO Bank (supra), Punjab National Bank vs. ACI (supra) and IDBI Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT(supra) ha…

Miranda Tools Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-7(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1599/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Deputy Miranda Tools Private Commissioner of 1598/Mum/2023 2013-14 Limited, Income Tax, 005, Peninsula Tower, -7(3)(2), Peninsula Corporate Aayakar Bhavan, Park, M.K. Road, Ganpatrao Kadam Mumbai Marg, 1599/Mum/2023 2014-15 Lower Parel, Mumbai PAN: AAACP7200N For Assessee : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, For Revenue : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 06-08-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 13-09-2024 O R D E R PER OM PRAKASH KAN…

Miranda Tools Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 7(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1598/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Deputy Miranda Tools Private Commissioner of 1598/Mum/2023 2013-14 Limited, Income Tax, 005, Peninsula Tower, -7(3)(2), Peninsula Corporate Aayakar Bhavan, Park, M.K. Road, Ganpatrao Kadam Mumbai Marg, 1599/Mum/2023 2014-15 Lower Parel, Mumbai PAN: AAACP7200N For Assessee : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, For Revenue : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 06-08-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 13-09-2024 O R D E R PER OM PRAKASH KAN…

Idfc First Bank Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Range Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

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

ITA 221/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ct would not be attracted to such income. This has been answered clearly by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also approved the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. State Bank of Patiala (2017) 393 ITR 476 (P&H). The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court islaw of the land and binding for us and hence, by following the same, we direct the Assessing Officer to recompute thedisallowance of expenses relatable to exempt income in term of Rule 8D(2)(ii) r.w.s 14A of the Act by excluding shares and securities held by the assessee bank as stock in trade…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 399/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 397/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 396/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 395/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 394/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 393/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the purchase and sale of shares/ securities as a trader with the object of earning profit and not with a view to earn interest or dividend. The assessee did not have an investment portfolio and…

DCIT-CC-III, Ludhiana vs. M/S Laxmi Energy & Foods Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 33/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 33/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Dcit, Vs. M/S Laxmi Energy & Foods बनाम Ltd., Central Circle-Iii, Sco 18-19, Sector 9-D, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacl3147J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Mode ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rohit Sharma, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.06.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.07.2024 आदेश/Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR
Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT & DR KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 33/CHD/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 The DCIT, Vs. M/s Laxmi Energy & Foods बनाम Ltd., Central Circle-III, SCO 18-19, Sector 9-D, Ludhiana Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AAACL3147J अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( HYBRID MODE ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing :…

ACIT-2(1)(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Bkc, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3412/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Ita Nos.3409 & 3412/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2013-14) Acit, Circle 2(1)(1) Vs. M/S Bank Of Baroda Room No. 575, 5Th Floor, 2Nd Floor, Baroda Aayakar Bhavan, Corporate Centre, C-26, M.K. Road, G Block, Bkc, Bandra Mumbai – 400 020 East, Mumbai- 400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacb1534F Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: C. NareshFor Respondent: S. Srinivasu
Section 10(15)(iv)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 14A

…P a g e | 1 ITA Nos. 3409 & 3412/Mum/2023 ACIT, Circle 2(1)(1) Vs. M/s Bank of Baroda IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER, ITA Nos.3409 & 3412/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2013-14) ACIT, Circle 2(1)(1) Vs. M/s Bank of Baroda Room No. 575, 5th Floor, 2nd Floor, Baroda Aayakar Bhavan, Corporate Centre, C-26, M.K. Road, G Block, BKC, Bandra Mumbai – 400 020 East, Mumbai- 400051 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAACB1534F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : C. Naresh Respondent by : S. Srinivasu Dat…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Essar Ports Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 406/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 14ASection 4A

…is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Jeint Investments Vs. CIT (372 ITR 694) (Del). Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Pr. CIT Vs. State Bank of Patiala (2017) 393 ITR 476 (P & H). The 'Special Leave Petition (for short 'SLP) filed by the revenue against the aforesaid the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana had been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Principal CIT, Patiala Vs. State Bank of Patiala (2018) 259 Taxman 314 (SC) Further, the coordinate benches of the Tribunal had also concluded…

Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 34, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1412/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1411 & 1412/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Income Tax, Circle -34, 15, Strand Road Kolkata - 700001 Kolkata [Pan : Aaajk0361L] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. M. Sundaram, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : Both These Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre - Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 27/10/2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19 & Dt. 06/11/2023 For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19:- “1. Disallowance Of Rs.68,13,600 U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D(2)(Ii) Is Liable To Be Deleted For The Following Reasons Since The Undisputedly The Appellant Had Nil Exempt Income & That The Entire Investments Are Made In Port Related Strategic Entities Out Of Its Own Funds. A) As Duly Mentioned In Paragraph No.8.7 Of The Impugned Order, The Issue Of Whether The Explanation To Section 14A Inserted W.E.F. 01.04.2022 Is Prospective Or Retrospective Is Not Settled & Hon'Ble High Court Of Delhi Has Held It To Be Applicable Prospectively, Namely W.E.F. Ay 2022-23, Which Subsequent To The Subject Ay 2018-19. 2

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Sundaram, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 14ASection 250Section 41(1)

…ich subsequent to the subject AY 2018-19. 2 I.T.A. No. 1411 & 1412/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port b) This disallowance is to be restricted to Rs.NIL as per ratio held in the case of PCIT v State Bank of Patiala [2018] 99 Taxmann.com 285 (Haryana) affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported as [2018] 99 taxmann.com 286 (SC), since the undisputedly the appellant had NIL exempt income. c) This disallowance is made @ 1 % of the "average of Opening balance and Closing balance of Investments" which is other than what is prescribed in rule 8D((2)(ii), namely @ 1% of the "annual…

Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 34, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1411/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 1411 & 1412/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port Deputy Commissioner Of Vs Income Tax, Circle -34, 15, Strand Road Kolkata - 700001 Kolkata [Pan : Aaajk0361L] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. M. Sundaram, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21/02/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/04/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Bench : Both These Appeals Are Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre - Delhi (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 27/10/2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19 & Dt. 06/11/2023 For The Assessment Year 2020-21 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”). 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19:- “1. Disallowance Of Rs.68,13,600 U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D(2)(Ii) Is Liable To Be Deleted For The Following Reasons Since The Undisputedly The Appellant Had Nil Exempt Income & That The Entire Investments Are Made In Port Related Strategic Entities Out Of Its Own Funds. A) As Duly Mentioned In Paragraph No.8.7 Of The Impugned Order, The Issue Of Whether The Explanation To Section 14A Inserted W.E.F. 01.04.2022 Is Prospective Or Retrospective Is Not Settled & Hon'Ble High Court Of Delhi Has Held It To Be Applicable Prospectively, Namely W.E.F. Ay 2022-23, Which Subsequent To The Subject Ay 2018-19. 2

For Appellant: Shri K. M. Sundaram, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 14ASection 250Section 41(1)

…ich subsequent to the subject AY 2018-19. 2 I.T.A. No. 1411 & 1412/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2018-19 & 2020-21 Syama Prasad Mookerjee Port b) This disallowance is to be restricted to Rs.NIL as per ratio held in the case of PCIT v State Bank of Patiala [2018] 99 Taxmann.com 285 (Haryana) affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported as [2018] 99 taxmann.com 286 (SC), since the undisputedly the appellant had NIL exempt income. c) This disallowance is made @ 1 % of the "average of Opening balance and Closing balance of Investments" which is other than what is prescribed in rule 8D((2)(ii), namely @ 1% of the "annual…

Il&Fs Maritime Infrastructure Company Limited, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3558/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Hetal Vora &For Respondent: H.M. Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 14A

…Page 1 ITA No.3558/Mum/2023 IL & FS Maritime Infrastructure Company Ltd. Vs. The DCIT, 14(1)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.3558/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2013-14) IL & FS Maritime Infrastructure Company Ltd, Plot, C-22, G Block, the IL & FS Financial Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400051 Vs. The DCIT, 14(1)(1) Room No. 432, 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AABCI7029R Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Ms. Hetal Vora…