← All Phrases

“Section 94(7)”

Section References (mined)Section 94Section 94(7)59 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 94(7) is CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (326 ITR 1), cited in 543 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 94(7)

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.
326 ITR 1 · 2010 · Supreme Court
543
citing judgments

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stockbrokers (P) Ltd.
233 CTR 42 · 2010 · Supreme Court
19
citing judgments

Disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A requires a proximate cause establishing the relationship between the expenditure and the exempt income. The expenditure must have a real, dominant, and immediate relationship with income not forming part of the total income.

Calcutta in Eveready Industries India Ltd. v. CIT & Anr.
334 ITR 413 · 2011 · High Court
15
citing judgments

The court examines a transaction involving the purchase and sale of UTI units with a short holding period, highlighting the cum-dividend purchase in relation to a booking closing date.

Judgments citing Section 94(7)

Punita Kalpesh Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2054/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 10(34)Section 10(35)Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 144BSection 54FSection 94(7)

mutual fund units and set off against LTCG. The A.O. examined the transactions and found that a significant number satisfied the conditions under section 94(7) of the Act namely [i] purchase within 3 months before the record date and [ii] sale within 3 months (for shares) or 9 months ... Punita Kalpesh Patel Vs. ACIT 3. Aggrieved against the assessment order the assessee filed an appeal. The appellant contends that section 94(7) applies only to exempt dividends (i.e. Rs.10,00,000/- for shares and the full for mutual funds) and only to transactions strictly meeting the timing conditions, limiting

Ramesh Purshottam Modi, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Circle 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6577/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarramesh Purshottam Ito Circle 22(1) Modi Income Tax 303, Modi House, Linking Vs. Department, Road, Khar West, Piramal Chamber, Mumbai-400 052 Dr. Ss Rao Marg, Parel, Mumbai 0 400 012 Pan/Gir No. Aahpm2793F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashwani Kumar A/W Ms. Deepali Aggarwal, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Umashankar Prasad, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 94(7)Section 94(8)

section 147 of the Act. The assessee further contended that the transactions relating to investment in mutual fund units and the applicability of section 94(7) and section 94(8) of the Act had already been examined by the Assessing Officer during the original scrutiny proceedings and, therefore, reopening ... learned AR further submitted that as per the alleged modus operandi, after receiving dividends and immediately after crossing the time limits prescribed under section 94(7) and 94(8), the units were to be redeemed. However, in the assessee’s case, being a genuine long-term investor, the majority

Ladderup Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 7404/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarladderup Finance Circle 14(1)(1), Limited Mumbai 1St Floor Hallmark Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Business Plaza, Mumbai-400 020 Gurunanak Hospital Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400051 Pan/Gir No. Aaacl0882G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rushabh Mehta Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.01.2026

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 111ASection 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 4.4. Further, a sum of Rs. 2,800/- was disallowed under section 94(7) of the Act on account of dividend stripping, which was accepted by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. Penalty proceedings under section

Unipatch Rubber Limited, Delhi vs. DCIT/ACIT, Circle 25(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4439/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4439/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम Unipatch Rubber Limited, Dcit/Acit, Building No.10, Community Centre, Vs. Circle 25(1), Saket, Delhi. Delhi. Pan No.Aaacu0325P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 250oSection 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 80ISection 94(7)

ITA No.4439/Del/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Vireet Investments Private Limited, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed as boave for statistical purpose

ITA 3010/DEL/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(38)Section 115J

days of purchase of funds and therefore Section 94 should be invoked. 4.10 In this regard we wish to submit that provisions of Section 94(7) can only be applicable on the short term capital loss. However, the issue we are dealing is of long term capital gains, therefore, provisions ... section 94(7) cannot be invoked here and further the Ld. Assessing officer has specifically made an addition of Rs.3,18,320/- u/s 94(7) which the appellant has accepted and has not appealed against the same. 4.11 Your honour is hereby requested to delete the addition as made

Shyam Greenfield Developer Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1164/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

mutual funds units of M/s IM Financial Asset Management Limited to the extent of dividend received, in accordance with the provision of the Section 94(7), there was no further income escaping assessment and in that view of the matter, the impugned reopening and the consequent order passed ... loss incurred on sale of JM Mutual Fund to the extent of dividend income of Rs.1,01,10,807/- in terms of Section 94(7), the further short term capital loss of Rs.2,09,340/- claimed in the return of income filed for the relevant

M/S. Kanak Projects Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1283/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Sept 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G & Shri Sonjoy Sarmam/S Kanak Projects Limited, Vs Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata Salarpuria Jajodia @ Co. 7, Chittaranjan Avenue, Kolkata-700072 Pan No. Aabck 1255 F (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sujoy Sen, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kapil Mandal, Addl.Cit-Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 19 /09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manjunatha G, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 07.04.2025 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee E-Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 26.09.2013 Declaring Total Income At Rs.6,11,89,350/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny & The Assessment Has Been Completed U/S.143(3) Of The Act On 09.03.2016 & Determined The Total Income At Rs.6,77,12,890/- By, Inter Alia, Making Additions Towards Disallowance Of Capital Expenditure For Rs.52,58,956/-, Rental Income Not Offered To Tax At Rs.8,77,945/-, Disallowance Of Excess Depreciation At Rs.3,75,000/- & Addition Towards Dividend Stripping Income U/S.94(7) Of The Act For Rs.1,636/-.

For Appellant: Shri Sujoy Sen, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mandal, Addl.CIT-Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 94(7)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI MANJUNATHA G, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Sanjula Sumati Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3002/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Sanjula Sumati Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3001/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Lalita Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3000/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Kanta Ganpatlal Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands

ITA 2999/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee's claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Kanta Ganpatlal Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2998/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Anita Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2996/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Lalita Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2990/MUM/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Anita Kothari, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2988/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

Section 10(35)Section 133A

necessary to consider the intent of the legislation with respect to loss incurred in case of issue of dividend as considered in section 94(7) of the Act. The memorandum notes for bringing out the said section into statute as published in the CBDT Circular No.14/2001, the relevant extracts (Para ... held as non genuine merely because of issue of dividend by the JM Financial fund if the holding period is not covered by section 94(7). Coming to the validity of the assessee’s claim regarding the short-term capital loss/profit, it is noted that the appellant had made

DCIT, Mumbai vs. 2015 Grover Family Trust, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5108/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 94(7)(E)

distributors/NHIs/Big Corporates with the plan of providing fictitious STCL and distributing dividend (exempt from täxation) which would not fall within the purview of section 94(7) of the IT Act. iv. The target Investors are about the modus operandi and the possible tax benefit that they would avall by subscribing ... time. Dividend is distributed just after 3 months and few days from the last date of investment. This ensures that the provisions of section 94(7) were not applicable to the investors. vii. The new investors infuse money into this scheme, as per their requirements to ensure that they

DCIT, Mumbai vs. Cms Computers Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5105/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 94(7)(E)

distributors/NHIs/Big Corporates with the plan of providing fictitious STCL and distributing dividend (exempt from täxation) which would not fall within the purview of section 94(7) of the IT Act. iv. The target Investors are about the modus operandi and the possible tax benefit that they would avall by subscribing ... time. Dividend is distributed just after 3 months and few days from the last date of investment. This ensures that the provisions of section 94(7) were not applicable to the investors. vii. The new investors infuse money into this scheme, as per their requirements to ensure that they

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Civic Centre, New Delhi vs. Harish Kumar, Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4676/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2015-16 Harish Kumar Vs. Nfac, Delhi 5/21, Shanti Niketan, Chankaya Puri, South West Delhi, New Delhi – 21 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs. Harish Kumar, Room No. 1505, 15Th Floor, E-2 1/7, West Patel Nagar Tower, Dr. Sp Mukherjee New Delhi – 8 Civic Centre, New Delhi – 2 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca & Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Surender Pal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.8.2024 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT(DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 3Section 94(7)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND

Harish Kumar, Delhi vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4602/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Agarwal, Hon’Bleasstt. Year : 2015-16 Harish Kumar Vs. Nfac, Delhi 5/21, Shanti Niketan, Chankaya Puri, South West Delhi, New Delhi – 21 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Asstt. Year : 2015-16 Acit, Vs. Harish Kumar, Room No. 1505, 15Th Floor, E-2 1/7, West Patel Nagar Tower, Dr. Sp Mukherjee New Delhi – 8 Civic Centre, New Delhi – 2 (Pan: Aaipk9783G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca & Sh. Sumaksh Mahajan, Ca Respondent By : Shri Surender Pal, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18.06.2025 Order Per Mahavir Singh, Vp : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Against The Order Dated 06.8.2024 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Agarwal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT(DR)
Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 3Section 94(7)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND

ACIT Cental Circle 8(2) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Subhkam Ventures (I) Private Limited, Mumbai

Appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the C

ITA 5657/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Respondent: Shri Mahendra Bishnoi
Section 10(35)Section 132Section 250Section 94(7)

incurred of Rs. 61,96,50,080/-by the Assessee on the sale of mutual funds, invoking the provisions of dividend stripping under Section 94(7) of the Income Tax Act?" 4 ITA 5657/M/24-CO 276/ M/ 24-ITA 5620/ M/24 -CO 277M/ 24- ITA 5622/M/24- Subhkam Ventures