Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO

181 TTJ 600Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2016#4109 most cited

What is Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee. Even if interest expenditure is considered, it cannot be solely attributed to earning exempt dividend income as investors also consider potential capital gains.

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO · Section 14A · Section 14A(1) · Section 14A(2) · Section 14A(3) · Rule 8D · exempt income · dividend income · disallowance u/s 14A · interest expenditure · capital gains

Also reported as

85 Taxmann.com 190

Sections most often in play

Section 1961: Section 10(34)Section 1961: Section 115JBSection 1961: Section 142(2)Section 1961: Section 143(3)(ii)Section 1961: Section 14ASection 1961: Section 14A(1)Section 1961: Section 14A(2)Section 1961: Section 14A(3)

Issues it is cited on

eligible assesseestatement under section 132(4)eligible businesssection 44aaddition under section 68section 44addisallowance under section 14ashare application moneydisallowance u/s 14arule 46asection 44long term capital gain

Judgments citing Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO

ACIT Cir 7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Essel Infraprojects Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6050/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanacit, Circle-7(3)(1) M/S Essel Infraprojects Ltd. Room No. 142, G, 135, Continental Building , 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Dr.Annie Besant Road, Worli, Vs. M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 4000018 Mumbai – 400020 Pan – Aaacp6095M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, D.RFor Respondent: None
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Empire Package (P) Ltd. (2017) 81 taxman.com 108 (P & H). Apart there from, we find that a similar view had been taken by the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of viz. (i) Tata Industries Ltd. Vs. ITO (2010) 181 TTJ 600 (Mum): and (ii) Future Corporate Resources Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2017) 85 taxman 190 (Mum). Accordingly, finding ourselves to be in agreement with the view taken by the CIT(A) that the disallowance under Sec. 14A cannot exceed the amount of the exempt income, we uphold his order to the said extent. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) restricting the di…

Patel Engineering Ltd( Successor of Patel Realty India Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(4), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1687/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri N.K. Pradhanita Nos.1687 & 1688/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012 -13 & 2013 -14) Patel Engineering Ltd. Dcit, Cc-3(4) (Successor Of Patel Realty India Room No. 1915 Ltd.), Patel Estate Road, Vs. 19Th Floor Air India Buildig, Jogeshwari (West), Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400102 Mumbai – 400021. Pan – Aaecp2373A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mayur Kisnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikiyan, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…assessee had not earned any exempt income during the relevant assessment year. Further, the ld. A.R relied on the order of a coordinate bench of the Tribunal viz. ITAT, Mumbai Bench “J” in the case of Tata Industries Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward 2 (3)(3), Mumbai (2016) 181 TTJ 600 (Mum). It was thus submitted by the ld. A.R that as the assessee had not earned any dividend income during the year under consideration, therefore, no disallowance u/s 14A was called for in its hands. 6. Per contra, the ld. Departmental Representative (for short „D.R‟) relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. We have heard the authorized…

Computer Age Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu 2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1142/CHNY/2018[214-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/CHNY/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3rd floor, LTU-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [PAN AAACC 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

Computer Age Management Services Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu 2, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for all the assessment years are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1140/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/Chny/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3Rd Floor, Ltu-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [Pan Aaacc 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, R. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. R. Clement Ramesh
Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1140, 1141 & 1142/CHNY/2018. "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment years : 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15. Computer Age Management Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Services Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, Rayala Towers, 3rd floor, LTU-2, 158, Anna Salai, Chennai. Chennai 600 002. [PAN AAACC 3035G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर…

Mangal Keshav Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 209/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. A.L. Saini, Hon’Blemangal Keshav Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit-4(3)(2), (Erstwhile Known As Mangal Mumbai. Keshav Holdings Ltd.) 501, Heritage Plaza, J.P. Road, Opp. Indian Oil Colony, Andheri (W), Mumbai. Pan No. Aaecm 6524 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agarwal–CAFor Respondent: Shri Saurabhkumar Rai – DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ule 8D (2) (iii) of I.T. Rules, which is not acceptable and it should be restricted up to the total exempted income of Rs. 40,068/- and for the he relied on the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Tata Industries Ltd. Vs. ITO[2016]181 TTJ 600 (Mum.), wherein it was held as follows:- “Even otherwise, the entire interest expenditure can not be attributed to earning of exempt dividend income only. Even an investor normally does not invest merely for earning of dividends. It also takes into consideration the possibility of rise in price of shares which may result into taxable capital gai…

Global Trading & Investment, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 271/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2018AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…14A, as sustained by the learned CIT(A), is Rs.5,22,140/-. Learned Departmental Representative fairly accepts that by now the legal position is well settled by series of orders of this Tribunal, including in the case of Tata Industries Limited vs. ITO, [2016] 181 TTJ 600 (Mumbai - Trib.), that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income in respect of which the disallowance has been so invoked. In this view of the matter and following the legal position so settled, we deem it fit and proper to restrict the disallowance to Rs.508/-. We order accordingly. 3. In the result, appeal is allowed. Pronounced…

Dciat 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sundaram Multipap Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5327/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 14A

…s made disallowance suo-moto and the relief, if granted, the assessed income would go below returned income. 15. The Ld A.R, in the rejoinder, submitted that an identical issue was considered by the Co-ordinate bench in the case of Tata Industries Ltd (2016)(181 TTJ 600) and it was held that the assessing officer is entitled to collect only legitimate tax from the assessee and hence the assessed income may go below the returned income, if the disallowance has been made by the assessee under misconception of law. 16. We have heard rival contention on this issue and perused the record. Various decisions relied up…

Stci Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG (OSD) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 6321/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstci Finance Limited The Dcit (Osd) -1(2), A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Marathon Innova, Marathon Mumbai-400020. Nextgen Compound, Off Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aagcs9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) The Dcit (Osd) -1(2), Stci Finance Limited A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Marathon Innova, Marathon Vs. Nextgen Compound, Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aagcs9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Karthik Natrajan & : Ms. Hetal Vora, (Ar) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.09.2017 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. These Two Appeal U/S 253 Of The Income-Tax Act (The Act) Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Mumbai Dated 14.06.2014 For The Assessment Year (Ay)

For Respondent: Shri V. Justin (Sr. DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER STCI Finance Limited The DCIT (OSD) -1(2), A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Marathon Innova, Marathon Mumbai-400020. Nextgen Compound, Off Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 PAN: AAGCS9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) The DCIT (OSD) -1(2), STCI Finance Limited A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Marathon Innova, Marathon Vs. Nextgen Compound, Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013…

Asst CIT 1(3), Mumbai vs. Stci Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is

ITA 6125/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstci Finance Limited The Dcit (Osd) -1(2), A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Marathon Innova, Marathon Mumbai-400020. Nextgen Compound, Off Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aagcs9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) The Dcit (Osd) -1(2), Stci Finance Limited A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Marathon Innova, Marathon Vs. Nextgen Compound, Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 Pan: Aagcs9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Karthik Natrajan & : Ms. Hetal Vora, (Ar) Revenue By : Shri V. Justin (Sr. Dr) Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.09.2017 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. These Two Appeal U/S 253 Of The Income-Tax Act (The Act) Are Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-2, Mumbai Dated 14.06.2014 For The Assessment Year (Ay)

For Respondent: Shri V. Justin (Sr. DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER STCI Finance Limited The DCIT (OSD) -1(2), A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Marathon Innova, Marathon Mumbai-400020. Nextgen Compound, Off Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013 PAN: AAGCS9709K (Appellant) (Respondent) The DCIT (OSD) -1(2), STCI Finance Limited A/B 1-802, A Wing, 8th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020. Marathon Innova, Marathon Vs. Nextgen Compound, Off Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-400013…