How many judgments cite REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT?

346 judgments on BharatTax cite REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT (144 ITD 141), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 250, Section 143(3), Section 8D, Section 142(1).

REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT

144 ITD 141Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2013#221 most cited

What is REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D applies only to investments that have yielded exempt income in the year under consideration.

346

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

REI Agro Ltd v DCIT · Section 14A disallowance · Rule 8D · exempt income · dividend yielding investments · non-yielding investments · expenditure disallowance · Rule 8D application · Section 115JB · exempt income computation

Also reported as

35 Taxmann.com 404160 TTJ 107144 ITR 141

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 115JB Section 250 Section 143(3)Section 8D Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 14a section 10 previous year company section 14 india total income person business interest

Judgments citing REI Agro Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 37/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am] I.T.A. No. 37/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 14A

…is no exempt income, no disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act is called for. Therefore, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct disallowance @ .5% on the dividend earning scrip as held by Coordinate bench in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141. We order accordingly. Therefore, this ground of appeal of revenue is partly allowed. 5. Ground no. 3 of revenue’s appeal is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of notional interest of Rs.75,00,000/- on sticky loan. Briefly stated facts are that the AO observed from the note to Financial Statement of Accounts contained in the…

The Kilburn Engineering Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1008/KOL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1008/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2008-09 The Kilburn Engineering Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-1, Kolkata. [Pan: Aabck 3421 H ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ansul Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ingly any disallowance of expenses u/s 14A of the Act towards administrative expenses could be made only with respect to such investments. Respectfully following the co-ordinate Bench decision of this Tribunal rendered in the case of REI Agro Ltd. reported in 144 ITD 141, we direct the ld. AO to make disallowance under third limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules by considering only dividend bearing investment subject to maximum of dividend income. Accordingly, ground nos. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are partly allowed. 6. The next issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the reduction of least of cash loss…

ACIT, Circle - 40, Kolkata vs. Assam Bengal Carriers, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed

ITA 25/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 25/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2014-15 A.C.I.T. Circle 40, Kolkata..............................…………………………...........................Appellant 2Nd Floor, 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata – 700 001 Assam Bengal Carriers....................…………………………………………….................Respondent P-10, New Cit Road, Kolkata – 700 073 [Pan: Aaffa 0462 R] Appearances By: Md. Ghyas Uddin, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri Harsh Vardhan Bharadwaj, Fca & Shri V.N. Purohit, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 22, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 24, 2018 Order

Section 14A

…ing to the effect that investment made by the assessee firm in ABC India Ltd. is a strategic investment. This fact has not been controverted by the revenue before us. It is already settled by the order of this tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. reported in 144 ITD 141 (Kol ITAT) wherein it was held that only dividend bearing investments must be considered for the purpose of disallowance u/s 14A of the act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. We find that the issue of exclusion of strategic investments for the purpose of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act has been decided by the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in th…

Sri Manindra Mohan Mazumdar, Burdwan vs. JCIT, Range-1, Asansol

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

ITA 2201/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2201/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sri Manindra Mohan Vs. J.C.I.T, Range-1, Asansol Mazumdar Sahana Apartment Mother Teressa 19, Radhangar Road, Burnpur- 713325, Road, Lower Chelidanga, Asansol – Dist- Burdwan. 713304. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aelpm 0074 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.2201/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sri Manindra Mohan Vs. J.C.I.T, Range-1, Asansol Mazumdar Sahana Apartment Mother Teressa 19, Radhangar Road, Burnpur- 713325, Road, Lower Chelidanga, Asansol – Dist- Burdwan. 713304. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. :AELPM 0074 R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by :Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA Respondent by :Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date of Hearing : 14/03/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 23/05/2018 आदे…

Eih Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-8(1)Kol., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 117/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Eih Ltd V/S. Dcit, Circle-8(1), 4, Mangoe Lane, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Kolkata-700 001 Chowringhee Square, [Pan No.Aaace 6898 B] Kolkata-69 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Ravi Sharma, Ar अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 27-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-05-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-2, (Drp For Short) Dated 17.10.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata U/S 144C(13)/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 29.11.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13 & Grounds Raised By Assessee Read As Under:- “1.0 Determination Of Arm'S Length Price For Corporate Guarantee Fees 1.1 On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Transfer Pricing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Tpo") & Accordingly Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld. Ao") Erred In Treating The Corporate Guarantee Extended By The Appellant To Its Associated Enterprise (Ae) As International Transaction & Dispute Resolution Panel (Hereinafter Referred To As "Ld, Panel") Erred In Confirming The Same As An International Transaction Without Appreciating The Fact That It Does Not Fall Within The Ambit Of "International Transaction" U/S 92B Of The Act. 1.2 The Ld.Ao/Tpo & The Ld. Panel Failed To Appreciate The Fact That Corporate Guarantee Has Been Advanced By The Appellant As A Matter Of Commercial Prudence To Protect The Business Interest Of The Group By Fulfilling

Section 14Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 92B

…, are to be considered ITA No.117/Kol/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 EIH Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kol. Page 15 while working out the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules as has been held by the decision of this tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in 144 ITD 141. But we find that if the disallowance made under second limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules is deleted, then the disallowance made by the ld AO would remain at Rs 23,77,882/- and whereas the assessee itself had voluntarily disallowed Rs 42,48,850/-. Hence we direct the ld AO to adopt the disallowance figure of Rs 42,48,850/- which had already been di…

DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Shree Capital Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1835/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Navin Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…We hold that only investments that had yielded dividend income are to be considered for the purpose of computing disallowance under the third limb of Rule 8D(2) of the rules in consonance with the decision of this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd vs DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol). However, while computing such disallowance, the amount already disallowed by the assessee in the sum of Rs.5,13,033/- should be reduced. We also hold that the disallowance of indirect expenses under the third limb, cannot by any stretch of imagination exceed the total indirect expenses debited by the assessee in its profit and loss account…

Shree Capital Services Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1808/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Navin Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Chemical & Metallurgical Design Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT- (OSD), Cen. Cir-Xx, Kolkata

In the result the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1092/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T (Ss) A.Nos.94 & 95/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri D.S.Damle, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

…1. With regard to the disallowance made under the third limb of Rule 8D, we direct the ld. AO to consider only those investments that had yielded dividend income in consonance with the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in 144 ITD 141. Accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee for A.Y.2008- 09 are allowed for statistical purposes. Deduction u/s 10A of the Act Grounds No.4 to 7 of A.Y.2008-09 12. Brief facts of this issue is that the assessee during the year under appeal commenced ‘computer software development and online recruitment service business’ in addition to its r…

Chemical & Metallurgical Design Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT- (OSD), Cen. Cir-Xx, Kolkata

In the result the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1091/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T (Ss) A.Nos.94 & 95/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri D.S.Damle, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

Chemical & Metallurgical Design Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT- (OSD), Cen. Cir-Xx, Kolkata

In the result the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 1090/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T (Ss) A.Nos.94 & 95/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri D.S.Damle, ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT(DR)

Section 143(3)

JCIT (OSD), Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Kalamkari Designs (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1310/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1310/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Jcit(Osd), Circle-11(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Kalamkari Designs Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aabck 2117 N ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri D.S. Damle, FCA

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ith regard to disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), he directed the ld AO to re-compute the disallowance by considering only dividend bearing investments in line with the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in 144 ITD 141. Aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us on the following ground:- 1. that on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing relief to the assessee by containing addition made u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. 2.3. We have heard the rival submissions. At the outset, from the perusal of the b…

DCIT, Cir-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Champion Commercial Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1421/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Dcit, Circle-10(1), V/S. M/S Champion P-7, Chowringhee Commercial Co. Ltd., Square, 3Rd Floor, P-15, Cit Road, Kolkata-69 Kolkata-73 [Pan No.Aabcc 2373 G] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit-Sr-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 26-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 27-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Dated 04.04.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 10.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “I. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,50,938/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37(1) Overrule The Judicial Pronouncement Of Cit Vs. Calcutta Agency Limited (1951) (191) Itr (Sc) Ii. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.13,91,404/- On A Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The It Act, 1961. Iii. That On The Facts Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.20,25,329/- On Wrong Appreciation Of Facts Ignoring The

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 195Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 44A

…d for appellants business. 6.3 The appellant has filed details of the investments on 31.3.2012 and 31.3.2013 on which the exempted income in the form of dividend income was earned. In view of the decision of the Kolkata ITAT REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in 144 ITD 141 only those investments which give rise to exempt income can be taken into consideration for working out the disallowance sin the formula laid down as per Rule 8D read with sec 14A of the IT Act. therefore as per the details furnished of the investments as on 31.3.2012 and 31.3.2013 on which dividend income was earned during the year the disallowa…

Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-10, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 239/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 239/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Eureka Forbes Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Range-10, Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 5767 F ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Samir Chakraborty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

…owance to be made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, we hold that only dividend bearing investments should be taken into account for the purpose of computation thereon in the light of decision rendered by this tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd reported in 144 ITD 141 (Kol Trib). The ld AO is also directed to exclude investments made in foreign companies, if any, as the dividend received from such companies, if any, would not be exempt income and hence the provisions of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules cannot be made applicable thereon. 7.4. The Grounds raised by the assessee are disposed…

ACIT, Ltu-1, Kolkata vs. M/S Hindustan Copper Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1616/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2012-13 Acit, Ltu-1, V/S. M/S Hindustan Copper 6Th Floor, Large Tax Ltd., Tamra Bhawan, Payer Unit, 180, Ashutosh Chowdhury Shantipally, Kolkata-107 Avenue, Kolkata-19 [Pan No.Aaach 7409 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Md. Usman Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sanjay Bhattacharya, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 16-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, Kolkata Dated 11.05.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Ltu-1, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 12.03.2015 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The Grounds Raised By Revenue Reads As Under:- “1(A) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit Erred In Law & On Facts While Holding That Club Subscription Fees Were Annual Subscriptions Including Renewal Of Corporate Club Member Fees Whereas The Club Subscription Fees Were Actually Capital Expenditure Amounting To Rs.18,75,767/- & Were Never Claimed By Assessee In Earlier Years As Revenue Expenditure. (B) That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts While Holding That The Club Subscription Fees Were Revenue In Nature & Not Capital Expenditure Relying On The Decision Of Dcit Vs. Makers Development Services Ltd. [1994] 75 Taxman 125 (Bom).

Section 143(3)

…only be considered for the purpose of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the IT Rules, 1962. In this regard, we find support and guidance from the order of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 35 taxmann.com 404/144 ITD 141 (Kol.) which was also affirmed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court vide Order dated 09.04.2014 in GA No. 3581 of 2013, wherein it was held that the disallowance as per Rule 8D shall be made by taking into consideration only those shares, which have yielded dividend income in the year under consideration. Therefore we direct the AO to make the disa…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Kamarhatty Company Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of Revenue (in Ground No

ITA 2080/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Dr.A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2011-12

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…T 317 ITD 33 (Delhi) wherein it was held that if the assessee does not receive dividend income or exempt income, the disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D is not warranted. Besides, the coordinate Bench of ITAT Kolkata in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) has held that it is only the investments which yields dividend during the previous year that has to be considered while adopting the average value of investments for the purpose of Rule 8D(2)(ii) & (iii) of the Rules. The aforesaid view of the Tribunal has since been affirmed as correct by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in G.A.No.3581…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Anjana Projects Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1570/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2010-11

Section 14ASection 263

…g the year can only be considered for the purpose of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of IT Rules. In holding so we find guidance & support from the order of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2013] 35 taxmann.com 404/144 ITD 141 (Kol.) which was also affirmed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court vide Order dated 09.04.2014 in GA No. 3581 of 2013, wherein it was held that the disallowance as per Rule 8D shall be made by taking into consideration only those shares, which have yielded dividend income in the year under consideration. Therefore we direct the AO to make the disa…

ACIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Wellside Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal of revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1680/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 24

…l investment of the company and thus disallowed Rs.10,76,698/-. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs.13,712/- which is .5% of the assessee’s investment in mutual funds. We note that the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in REI Agro Ltd. 144 ITD 141, held that only investments which has given rise to exempt income should be taken into consideration. This order has been upheld by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court vide order dated 23.12.2013 and Special Bench of ITAT, Delhi in ACIT Vs. Vineet Investments in ITA No. 502/Del/2012 dt. 16.06.2017. Since the .5% of Mutual Fund investment has been dis…

M/S Vistar Financiers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-10(4), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1673/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: "ी पी.एम .जगताप, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri P. M. Jagtap, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…T(A) has taken note that assessee has capitalized the interest expenditure and not claimed any interest expenditure. We note that the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the consistent view of this Tribunal in respect to computation under Rule 8D(2)(iii) in REI Agro Ltd. 144 ITD 141 wherein the Tribunal held that only investments which has given rise to the exempted income should be taken into consideration. This order of the Tribunal has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court. So, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and we confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the appeal of asses…

Punjab Produce Holdings Ltd, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 2057/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Mar 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 2057/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Punjab Produce Holdings Ltd................................……………….....................Appellant Birla Building, 4Th Floor, 9/1, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan: Aabcm 7053 M] Dcit Cir 5(1),...................………………………………………………………………………Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, 8Th Floor, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069 Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhuwala, Ar Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Pinaki Mukherjee, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 22, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 21, 2018

Section 115JSection 14A

…der section 14A by applying Rule 8D after taking into account only that investment in shares which had yielded dividend income during the year under consideration. For this conclusion, he relied on the decision of the ITAT in the case of REI Agro Ltd. vs DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol). Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. 3 I.T.A. No. 2057/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Punjab Produce Holdings Ltd. 4. I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the learned counsel for the…

Imc Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1239/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1150/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Jcit(Osd),Cir-11(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Imc Ltd. [Pan: Aaaci 6884 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1239/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S Imc Ltd. -Vs- Jcit(Osd),Cir-11(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaaci 6884 R] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri P. Jhunjhunwala, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ng and closing balance of investments. It was pleaded that only dividend bearing investments ought to have been taken by the ld. AO in any case by following the ratio laid down in the decision rendered by this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. reported in 144 ITD 141. The Ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the order of his predecessor in assessee’s own case for 2 M/s IMC Ltd. A.Yr.2008-09 the assessment year 2010-11 wherein disallowance under Rule 8D was made only under Third limb thereon by applying 0.5% of the average value of investments which yielded dividend income. The Ld. CIT(A) following the said order dir…