Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

77 Taxmann.com 257High Court2017#201 most cited

What is Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

No disallowance under Section 14A can be made in the absence of actual exempt income, as Section 14A relates to the earning of actual income, not notional or anticipated income, thereby declining to apply the CBDT Circular dated 11th May 2014 in such cases.

370

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · Section 14A disallowance · absence of exempt income · actual income · notional income · CBDT Circular 11 May 2014 · expenditure for exempt income · Madras High Court · 392 ITR 633 · 77 taxmann.com 257

Also reported as

392 ITR 633

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 250Section 35ADSection 35AD(7B)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

strategic investmentdisallowance of interest expendituredisallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14amercantile system of accountingsection 32section 9(1)commercial expediencysection 43section 43bsection 37

Judgments citing Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

ITO Corporate Ward 2(2), Chennai vs. Genda Builders Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2033/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2085/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Dharma Promoters (P) Ltd., Acit Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Company Circle –I(4), Barracks Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aaccd-8247-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2513/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Acit 341/36A, Ii Floor, Mangal Sain V. Corporate Circle -3(2), Building, Chennai -34. Bagh Kare Khan, Kishan Ganj, Delhi – 110 007. [Pan:Aaacz-3444-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1835/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Ito Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Corporate Ward -2(2), Barracks Road, Vepery, Chennai -34. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aadcg-0885-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ial on record, we find, in absence of exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962 and this legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd vs ACIT, [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad), where it has been clearly held that if no exempt income in the impugned :-36-: ITA. No: 2085/Chny/2014, 2513/Chny/2017, 2514/Chny/2017, 1835/Chny/2018, 2033/Chny/2018, & 348/Chny/2019 assessment year, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Chettinad Lo…

Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 2(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1835/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2085/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Dharma Promoters (P) Ltd., Acit Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Company Circle –I(4), Barracks Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aaccd-8247-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2513/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Acit 341/36A, Ii Floor, Mangal Sain V. Corporate Circle -3(2), Building, Chennai -34. Bagh Kare Khan, Kishan Ganj, Delhi – 110 007. [Pan:Aaacz-3444-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1835/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Ito Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Corporate Ward -2(2), Barracks Road, Vepery, Chennai -34. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aadcg-0885-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ial on record, we find, in absence of exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962 and this legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd vs ACIT, [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad), where it has been clearly held that if no exempt income in the impugned :-36-: ITA. No: 2085/Chny/2014, 2513/Chny/2017, 2514/Chny/2017, 1835/Chny/2018, 2033/Chny/2018, & 348/Chny/2019 assessment year, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Chettinad Lo…

Dharma Promoters Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 1(4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2514/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2085/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Dharma Promoters (P) Ltd., Acit Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Company Circle –I(4), Barracks Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aaccd-8247-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2513/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Acit 341/36A, Ii Floor, Mangal Sain V. Corporate Circle -3(2), Building, Chennai -34. Bagh Kare Khan, Kishan Ganj, Delhi – 110 007. [Pan:Aaacz-3444-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1835/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Ito Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Corporate Ward -2(2), Barracks Road, Vepery, Chennai -34. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aadcg-0885-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ial on record, we find, in absence of exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962 and this legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd vs ACIT, [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad), where it has been clearly held that if no exempt income in the impugned :-36-: ITA. No: 2085/Chny/2014, 2513/Chny/2017, 2514/Chny/2017, 1835/Chny/2018, 2033/Chny/2018, & 348/Chny/2019 assessment year, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Chettinad Lo…

Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2513/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2085/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Dharma Promoters (P) Ltd., Acit Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Company Circle –I(4), Barracks Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aaccd-8247-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2513/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Acit 341/36A, Ii Floor, Mangal Sain V. Corporate Circle -3(2), Building, Chennai -34. Bagh Kare Khan, Kishan Ganj, Delhi – 110 007. [Pan:Aaacz-3444-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1835/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Ito Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Corporate Ward -2(2), Barracks Road, Vepery, Chennai -34. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aadcg-0885-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ial on record, we find, in absence of exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962 and this legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd vs ACIT, [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad), where it has been clearly held that if no exempt income in the impugned :-36-: ITA. No: 2085/Chny/2014, 2513/Chny/2017, 2514/Chny/2017, 1835/Chny/2018, 2033/Chny/2018, & 348/Chny/2019 assessment year, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Chettinad Lo…

Dharma Promoters Pvt Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2085/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2085/Chny/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Dharma Promoters (P) Ltd., Acit Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Company Circle –I(4), Barracks Road, Chennai. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aaccd-8247-C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2513/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Zeya Developers Pvt Ltd., Acit 341/36A, Ii Floor, Mangal Sain V. Corporate Circle -3(2), Building, Chennai -34. Bagh Kare Khan, Kishan Ganj, Delhi – 110 007. [Pan:Aaacz-3444-Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1835/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Genda Buildcons Pvt Ltd., Ito Times Partner, No. 58, Permabur V. Corporate Ward -2(2), Barracks Road, Vepery, Chennai -34. Chennai – 600 007. [Pan:Aadcg-0885-B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ial on record, we find, in absence of exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962 and this legal principle is supported by the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd vs ACIT, [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad), where it has been clearly held that if no exempt income in the impugned :-36-: ITA. No: 2085/Chny/2014, 2513/Chny/2017, 2514/Chny/2017, 1835/Chny/2018, 2033/Chny/2018, & 348/Chny/2019 assessment year, then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, 1962. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Chettinad Lo…

Dhumal Industries, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

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

ITA 994/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.993 & 994/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dhumal Industries, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Nashik. E-36, D Road, Midc, Satpur, Nashik- 422007. Pan : Aacfd0528N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.05.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.993/Pun/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hether there is an exempt income or not, which the Assessing Officer failed to do so. The made. The various High Courts in catena of decisions held the same view and reference can be made to the following decisions :- (i) Redington (India) Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633 (Mad); (ii) CIT vs. Celebrity Fashion Ltd., 428 ITR 470 (Mad); (iii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad) (Against which the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd., 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC); (iv) CIT vs. Continuum Wind Energy (India) Pvt.…

Dhumal Industries, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

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

ITA 993/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.993 & 994/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dhumal Industries, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Nashik. E-36, D Road, Midc, Satpur, Nashik- 422007. Pan : Aacfd0528N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.05.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.993/Pun/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hether there is an exempt income or not, which the Assessing Officer failed to do so. The made. The various High Courts in catena of decisions held the same view and reference can be made to the following decisions :- (i) Redington (India) Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633 (Mad); (ii) CIT vs. Celebrity Fashion Ltd., 428 ITR 470 (Mad); (iii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad) (Against which the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd., 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC); (iv) CIT vs. Continuum Wind Energy (India) Pvt.…

M/S. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3205/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3203/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3202/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. Pvp Ventures Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3201/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

Wheels India Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Ltu 1 Chennai, Chennai

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2770/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43A

…ther appeal before us. 5.2 From the facts, it appears that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year and therefore, disallowance u/s 14A would not be attracted as held by Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Redington (India) Ltd. V/s Addl. CIT(77 Taxmann.com 257). Therefore, no interference is required in the impugned order, on this issue. The grounds urged by the revenue stand dismissed. 6. Realized loss on foreign currency loans: 6.1 The assessee claimed deduction of Rs.73.62 Lacs in the computation statement which represent realized loss on exchange fluctuation at the time of repayment of forei…

ACIT Ltu 2 Chennai, Chennai vs. Wheels India Limited, Chennai

Appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2700/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43A

…ther appeal before us. 5.2 From the facts, it appears that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year and therefore, disallowance u/s 14A would not be attracted as held by Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Redington (India) Ltd. V/s Addl. CIT(77 Taxmann.com 257). Therefore, no interference is required in the impugned order, on this issue. The grounds urged by the revenue stand dismissed. 6. Realized loss on foreign currency loans: 6.1 The assessee claimed deduction of Rs.73.62 Lacs in the computation statement which represent realized loss on exchange fluctuation at the time of repayment of forei…

Wheels India Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu-2, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2341/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. M.S. Deeptha (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…d, it is admitted position that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year and therefore, no such disallowance could have been made by revenue considering the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Redington (India) Ltd. V/s Addl. CIT (77 Taxmann.com 257). Similar view has been expressed by the bench in revenue’s appeal in para-10 of ITA No.2395/Chny/2017 order dated 11.10.2018. Therefore, we delete the disallowance u/s 14A as sustained in the impugned order. This ground stand allowed. G.No.8: Computation of deduction u/s 80-IC 3.1 Facts qua ground no.7 are that the assessee claimed deduct…

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 217/CHNY/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

…, rent, legal and professional fees formed major part of administrative expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated the disallowance at 50% of these expenditures. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Redington India Ltd. V/s ADIT (77 Taxmann.com 257) to submit that no disallowance would be attracted in cases where no exempt income was earned by the assessee. However, this plea was rejected. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4.3 It is settled position of law that Rule 8D apply prospectively only from AY 2008-09 and it would have no application in earlier years. Fu…

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 216/CHNY/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

…, rent, legal and professional fees formed major part of administrative expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated the disallowance at 50% of these expenditures. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Redington India Ltd. V/s ADIT (77 Taxmann.com 257) to submit that no disallowance would be attracted in cases where no exempt income was earned by the assessee. However, this plea was rejected. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4.3 It is settled position of law that Rule 8D apply prospectively only from AY 2008-09 and it would have no application in earlier years. Fu…

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 215/CHNY/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

…, rent, legal and professional fees formed major part of administrative expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated the disallowance at 50% of these expenditures. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Redington India Ltd. V/s ADIT (77 Taxmann.com 257) to submit that no disallowance would be attracted in cases where no exempt income was earned by the assessee. However, this plea was rejected. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4.3 It is settled position of law that Rule 8D apply prospectively only from AY 2008-09 and it would have no application in earlier years. Fu…

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 214/CHNY/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

…, rent, legal and professional fees formed major part of administrative expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated the disallowance at 50% of these expenditures. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Redington India Ltd. V/s ADIT (77 Taxmann.com 257) to submit that no disallowance would be attracted in cases where no exempt income was earned by the assessee. However, this plea was rejected. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4.3 It is settled position of law that Rule 8D apply prospectively only from AY 2008-09 and it would have no application in earlier years. Fu…

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 213/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

…, rent, legal and professional fees formed major part of administrative expenditure. The Ld. CIT(A) estimated the disallowance at 50% of these expenditures. The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in M/s Redington India Ltd. V/s ADIT (77 Taxmann.com 257) to submit that no disallowance would be attracted in cases where no exempt income was earned by the assessee. However, this plea was rejected. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4.3 It is settled position of law that Rule 8D apply prospectively only from AY 2008-09 and it would have no application in earlier years. Fu…

JCIT (OSD), Circle 14, Pune vs. Kumar Builder Mumbai Realty Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 22/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…2 of sub-section (3) of section 14A by the Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 1.4.2022 that in the absence of any exempt income, the provisions of section 14A cannot be invoked as held in the following plethora of decisions :- (i) Redington (India) Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633 (Mad); (ii) CIT vs. Celebrity Fashion Ltd., 428 ITR 470 (Mad); (iii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad) (Against which the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd., 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC); (iv) CIT vs. Continuum Wind Energy (India) Pvt.…