Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd.

416 ITR 13High Court2019#9958 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd. authority for?

The Assessing Officer must record their satisfaction before applying Rule 8D for disallowance under Section 14A, as the Supreme Court's decision in Maxopp Investment Limited did not dispense with this procedural requirement.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd · Section 14A · Rule 8D · Assessing Officer satisfaction · Maxopp Investment Limited · Shreno Limited · section 14A(2) · rule 8D(1)

Also reported as

108 Taxmann.com 560

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 263Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

section 14(2)goodwill arising on amalgamationsection 9(1)(ii)section 43(6)(c)section 14(1)section 55(2)section 10(33)section 14a disallowancesection 49section 115jaminimum alternate taxresulting company

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd.

Hn Safal Infra Developer Pvt Ltd (on Behalf of Safal Org Pvt Ltd), Ahmedabad vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 737/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 737/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) बनाम HN Safal Infra Developer Principal Commissioner Pvt. Ltd. (On behalf of of Income Tax / Safal Org. Pvt. Ltd.) Ahmedabad Vs. HN Safal House Beside Circle P Complex, Nr. Prahladnagar, SG Highway, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380015 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAVCS9736P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Vartik Chokshi, A.R. अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Rignesh Das, CIT. DR…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 303/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…is required to be satisfied as provided in sub-section 2 of section 14A of the Act-1961. 8. In the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:- "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 302/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…is required to be satisfied as provided in sub-section 2 of section 14A of the Act-1961. 8. In the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:- "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 199/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…is required to be satisfied as provided in sub-section 2 of section 14A of the Act-1961. 8. In the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:- "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 198/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…is required to be satisfied as provided in sub-section 2 of section 14A of the Act-1961. 8. In the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:- "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

Urmin Products Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 1007/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…n the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] ITA Nos. 1006 & 1007/Ahd/2023 Urmin Products Pvt Ltd. Vs. DCIT AY : 2018-19 and 2020-21 7 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:— "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

Urmin Products Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, Central Circle-1(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 1006/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Aseem L. Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…n the aforesaid context, we may refer recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd [2019] ITA Nos. 1006 & 1007/Ahd/2023 Urmin Products Pvt Ltd. Vs. DCIT AY : 2018-19 and 2020-21 7 108 taxmann.com 560/416 ITR 13 (Guj), wherein this Court has observed as under:— "17. This Court, in Shreno Limited (supra), has taken the view that Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) cannot be seen or understood to be fundamentally changing the understanding and interpretation of section 14A and Rule 8D. It went on to hold that the judgment of the Supreme Court does not lay dow…

Continental Device India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-6(2), New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 8314/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Senior DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…re Rs.94.84 Crore. i) HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2016] 383 ITR 529 (Bom): ii) CIT vs. Microlabs [2016] 383 ITR 490 (Karnataka); iii) CIT vs. Adani Enterprises Ltd. [2017] 396 ITR 313 (Gujarat). iv) Pro CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd. [ 2019] 416 ITR 13 (Guj) . Therefore, no disallowance of interest expenditure could be made u/r 8D(2)(ii).” 5. Ld. CIT (A), though accepted many of the contentions raised by the assessee, however reduced the disallowance to the extent of exempt income of Rs. 33,10,110/- relying upon the decision of the 5 Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Invest…

Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt. Ltd, Jharsuguda vs. Principal CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 195/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…17} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat) CIT Bangalore v. Brigade Enterprises Ltd. reported in [2020} 429 ITR 615 [Karnataka] Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. ACIT-3(1)(2), Bangalore reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com BO (Karnataka) Azimuth Investments Ltd. Vs ACIT, CircJe-2(l), New Delhi [ITA No.…

M/S- Sbep-Gril(Joint Venture), Jharsuguda vs. Principal CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 194/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…17} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat) CIT Bangalore v. Brigade Enterprises Ltd. reported in [2020} 429 ITR 615 [Karnataka] Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. ACIT-3(1)(2), Bangalore reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com BO (Karnataka) Azimuth Investments Ltd. Vs ACIT, CircJe-2(l), New Delhi [ITA No.…

M/S- Rawat Balaji (Joint Venture), Jharsuguda vs. Prilncipal, CIT, Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 193/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…17} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat) CIT Bangalore v. Brigade Enterprises Ltd. reported in [2020} 429 ITR 615 [Karnataka] Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. v. ACIT-3(1)(2), Bangalore reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com BO (Karnataka) Azimuth Investments Ltd. Vs ACIT, CircJe-2(l), New Delhi [ITA No.…

Pr. CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizer & Chemicals Ltd. (416 ITR 13) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax