Pr.CIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 244 Taxman 309 (Del.), Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT

138 TTJ 240Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#11121 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing Pr.CIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 244 Taxman 309 (Del.), Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT

CROMPTON GREAVES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 5390/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, 6Th Floor, Cg House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Revenue) : (Assessee) & M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) 6Th Floor, Cg House, R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri A. M. Mittal Revenue By Assessee By : Shri Pradip Kapasi Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2019

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi
Section 14(1)Section 14ASection 35

…d that instead of he erroneously assumed that such investments were made wholly out of borrowed funds; that as such, the disallowance requires deletion. Reference has been made to these decisions:  K. Raheja Corporation P. Limited  Minda Investment Ltd. 138 TTJ 240 (Delhi) (2011)  Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. 138 TTJ 244 (Delhi) (2011)  SIL Investment Ltd. 54 SOT 54 (Delhi) (2012) 31. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has contended that last but not the least, without prejudice, the disallowance ought to be, if at all, sustained to the expenditure actually incurred, which is an amount of Rs.7,91,181/- paid…

ACIT 6(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. CROMPTON GREAVES LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 5295/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, 6Th Floor, Cg House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Revenue) : (Assessee) & M/S. Crompton Greaves Ltd. Asst. Cit-6(2)(1) 6Th Floor, Cg House, R. No.504/563-C, 5Th Floor, Vs. Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacc 2089 A (Assessee) : (Revenue) : Shri A. M. Mittal Revenue By Assessee By : Shri Pradip Kapasi Date Of Hearing : 23.09.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.09.2019

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kapasi
Section 14(1)Section 14ASection 35

…d that instead of he erroneously assumed that such investments were made wholly out of borrowed funds; that as such, the disallowance requires deletion. Reference has been made to these decisions:  K. Raheja Corporation P. Limited  Minda Investment Ltd. 138 TTJ 240 (Delhi) (2011)  Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. 138 TTJ 244 (Delhi) (2011)  SIL Investment Ltd. 54 SOT 54 (Delhi) (2012) 31. The ld. Counsel of the assessee has contended that last but not the least, without prejudice, the disallowance ought to be, if at all, sustained to the expenditure actually incurred, which is an amount of Rs.7,91,181/- paid…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S JSL LTD.,, HISAR

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

… CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.: 363 ITR 474 (Guj)  CIT Vs Ms. Sushma Kapoor : 319 ITR 299 (Delhi)  CIT v. Adarsh Kumar Goel: [2011] 199 Taxman 149 (Punj. &Har.)(Mag.)  Wimco Seedlings Limited vs. DCIT : 107 ITD 267 (Del.)(TM)  Minda Investments Ltd. v. DCIT: 138 TTJ 240 (Del.)  Maruti Udyog Limited V. DCIT: 92 ITD 119 (Del.)  ACIT v. Eicher Limited: 101 TTJ 369 (Del.)  DLF Ltd. vs. CIT: 27 SOT 22 (Del)  Punjab National Bank V. DCIT: 103 TTJ 908 (Del.)  Vidyut Investment Ltd: [2006] 10 SOT 284 (Del.)  Impulse (India) Pvt. Ltd.: (2008) 22 SOT 368 (Del.)  D.J. Mehta v. ITO: 290 ITR 238 (Mum.)(AT)  Jindal Ph…

JINDAL STAINLESS LTD.,HISAR vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

… CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.: 363 ITR 474 (Guj)  CIT Vs Ms. Sushma Kapoor : 319 ITR 299 (Delhi)  CIT v. Adarsh Kumar Goel: [2011] 199 Taxman 149 (Punj. &Har.)(Mag.)  Wimco Seedlings Limited vs. DCIT : 107 ITD 267 (Del.)(TM)  Minda Investments Ltd. v. DCIT: 138 TTJ 240 (Del.)  Maruti Udyog Limited V. DCIT: 92 ITD 119 (Del.)  ACIT v. Eicher Limited: 101 TTJ 369 (Del.)  DLF Ltd. vs. CIT: 27 SOT 22 (Del)  Punjab National Bank V. DCIT: 103 TTJ 908 (Del.)  Vidyut Investment Ltd: [2006] 10 SOT 284 (Del.)  Impulse (India) Pvt. Ltd.: (2008) 22 SOT 368 (Del.)  D.J. Mehta v. ITO: 290 ITR 238 (Mum.)(AT)  Jindal Ph…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…the assessing officer before applying Rule 8D of the Rules, reliance is placed on the decisions reported in Pr.CIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 244 Taxman 309 (Del.), Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT: 275 CTR 471 (Del.), Minda Investments Ltd. vs. DCIT: 138 TTJ 240 ( Del.) , ACIT vs. MMTC Limited: ITA No. 724/Del/2014 (Del. Trib.), REI Agro Ltd vs. DCIT: 144 ITD 141 (Revenue appeal dismissed by Calcutta High Court in appeal No. GA No.3581 of 67 2013)., CIT v. Abhishek Industries Ltd - 231 Taxman 85 (P&H), 6.7. Second contention raised on behalf of the assessee is that the assessee is an operating company e…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…(Del.) , M/s Multi Commodity Exchange of (India) Ltd. Vs. DCIT: ITA No.1050/Mum/2010 (Mum.), M/s. Auchtel Products Ltd. vs ACIT: I.T.A. No. 3183 /Mum/2011 (Mum.), Om Era Engineering (P) Ltd. vs ITO: ITA No. 3913/D/2010 (Del.), Minda Investments Ltd. v. DCIT: 138 TTJ 240 (Del.), Punjab National Bank V. DCIT: 103 TTJ 908 (Del.), Vidyut Investment Ltd: [2006] 10 SOT 284 (Del.) , Impulse (India) Pvt. Ltd.: (2008) 22 SOT 368 (Del.) , D.J. Mehta v. ITO: 290 ITR 238 (Mum.)(AT), Jindal Photo Ltd vs. DCIT: ITA No. 814 (Del) 2011, Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Ltd. v. Dy. CIT: 45 SOT 37 (Ahd.), Minda Investments Ltd…

DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ring on record, the nexus between the expenses and the exempt income. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC) " Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT 347 ITR 272 (Del.) " Minda Investments Ltd. Vs DCIT 138 TTJ 240 (Del. Trib.) " Bunge Agribusiness India P. Ltd. Vs DCIT 132 ITD 549 (Del. Trib.) " Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs DCIT 92 ITD 119 (Del. Trib.) 32. It was further submitted that the artificial/ad-hoc disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not permissible without any cogent basis and material on record. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Godre…

EXL SERVICE.COM (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT (LTU), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 302/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ring on record, the nexus between the expenses and the exempt income. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC) " Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs CIT 347 ITR 272 (Del.) " Minda Investments Ltd. Vs DCIT 138 TTJ 240 (Del. Trib.) " Bunge Agribusiness India P. Ltd. Vs DCIT 132 ITD 549 (Del. Trib.) " Maruti Udyog Ltd. Vs DCIT 92 ITD 119 (Del. Trib.) 32. It was further submitted that the artificial/ad-hoc disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not permissible without any cogent basis and material on record. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " Godre…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…of the Tribunal in the case of Daga Capital (which now stands reversed by the Bombay High Court) was directed to be deleted in the absence of any positive finding by the assessing officer of incurring of any expense by the appellant: Minda Investments Ltd: 138 TTJ 240 (Del.) Om Era Engineering (P) Limited: ITA No. 3913/ Del/ 2010 17.17 The Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. K. Raheja Corporation Ltd.: ITA No. 1260/2009 held that in the absence of any material or basis to hold that the interest expenditure directly or indirectly was attributable for earning the dividend income, the disallowance of intere…

Pr.CIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 244 Taxman 309 (Del.), Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT (138 TTJ 240) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax