← All Phrases

“disallowance under section 14A”

DisallowancesSection 14ASection 14A2,288 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance under section 14A is CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd. (322 ITR 158), cited in 2,228 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance under section 14A

CIT v. Reliance Petroproducts Pvt. Ltd.
322 ITR 158 · 2010 · Supreme Court
2,228
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars or concealment of income is not automatically leviable if the assessee has made a full disclosure of all particulars and the addition or disallowance arises from a difference of opinion.

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court
1,596
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT
378 ITR 33 · 2015 · High Court
1,569
citing judgments

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT
288 ITR 1 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,484
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
165 ITD 27 · 2017 · ITAT
882
citing judgments

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

Judgments citing disallowance under section 14A

Teamlease Digital Pvt Ltd., South Bangalore vs. National E-Assessment Center, Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2101/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (Jm)

Section 14A

National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2018-19. The only issue urged in this appeal is related to the disallowance under section 14A of the I.T. Act. 2. We heard the parties and perused the record. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer ... crores Rs. 54.10 crores 2 Teamlease Digital Pvt. Ltd. The AO noticed that the assessee did not make any disallowance under section 14A of the Act. Even though the assessee submitted that it has not received any exempt income and hence no disallowance is called for, yet the Assessing Officer

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Carissa Investment Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1648/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Mayank Patwari, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 14A

facts and circumstances of the case whether the ld. CIT(A) erred is fact and in law in restricting the quantum of disallowance under section 14A to the amount of dividend income earned during the year under consideration. 2. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case whether

Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Central Circle-1(2), Now the Dcitcircle-2(1) (1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 307/AHD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2020-21) Goyal & Co. Dcit बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, Commerce House Iv, Beside Reliance Petrol Pump, 100Ft. Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcg5459R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Biren Shah & Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/11/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 05/02/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.03.2023 & 09.03.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Orders Dated 12.12.2019 & 29.03.2022 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad & Acit, Central Circle 1(2), Ahmedabad, Respectively; Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2020-21. Ita Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 (Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit) A.Y.– 2017-18 & 2020-21 - 2 - 2. Since Both The Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Relate To Similar Issue, These Are Heard Analogously & Are Being Disposed Of By A Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. We Take Ita No.306/Ahd/2023 For A.Y. 2017-18 As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah & Shri DhrunalFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

attributable to employee 21,600/- 10% of Office, Insurance, Stationary and Telephone 95,659/- Expenses (9,56,586 * 10%) Total disallowance under section 14A of the Act 4,62,259/- 4. Relevant to mention that the suo moto disallowance made above was duly audited and certified by Chartered Accountant ... same amount of Rs.4,62,259/- is disclosed in tax audit report for A.Y. 2017-18 in respect of expenses disallowed under Section 14A of the Act. On the contrary, the Ld. AO, however, disallowed ITA Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 (Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT

Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT Circle-2(1) (1), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed

ITA 306/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2020-21) Goyal & Co. Dcit बनाम/ Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, Commerce House Iv, Beside Reliance Petrol Pump, 100Ft. Road, Satellite, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcg5459R (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Biren Shah & Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, A.Rs. Revenue By : Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 09/11/2023 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 05/02/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeals Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders Dated 07.03.2023 & 09.03.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad (In Short ‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Orders Dated 12.12.2019 & 29.03.2022 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad & Acit, Central Circle 1(2), Ahmedabad, Respectively; Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2020-21. Ita Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 (Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit) A.Y.– 2017-18 & 2020-21 - 2 - 2. Since Both The Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Relate To Similar Issue, These Are Heard Analogously & Are Being Disposed Of By A Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. We Take Ita No.306/Ahd/2023 For A.Y. 2017-18 As A Lead Case.

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah & Shri DhrunalFor Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

attributable to employee 21,600/- 10% of Office, Insurance, Stationary and Telephone 95,659/- Expenses (9,56,586 * 10%) Total disallowance under section 14A of the Act 4,62,259/- 4. Relevant to mention that the suo moto disallowance made above was duly audited and certified by Chartered Accountant ... same amount of Rs.4,62,259/- is disclosed in tax audit report for A.Y. 2017-18 in respect of expenses disallowed under Section 14A of the Act. On the contrary, the Ld. AO, however, disallowed ITA Nos. 306 & 307/Ahd/2023 (Goyal & Co. (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT

Lakozy Motors Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Mumbai

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

ITA 2726/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

apply in relation to the assessment year 2022–23 and subsequent assessment years. Thus, even in view of the aforesaid amendment also, the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D is not permissible in the present case. Lakozy Motors Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.2726/Mum./2023 14. Thus, in view

Yes Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT(2)(2)(2), Mumbai

ITA 4278/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 14ASection 251Section 35DSection 8D(2)

Bank Ltd. ITA No. 3017,& 4278/M/2019 assessment year 2015-16. The grounds raised by the assessee reproduced as under: GROUND NO. I: DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT R.W.R 8D(2)(iii) of the INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 ("the Rules"): 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... that the AO be directed to delete the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUNDS I & III: GROUND NO. IV: NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT CAN BE MADE WHEN SECURITIES ARE HELD AS STOCK-IN- TRADE: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

ACIT - 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai

ITA 3017/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Acit-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15Th Floor, Yes Bank Tower, Ifc 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

Section 14ASection 251Section 35DSection 8D(2)

short 'he Ld. CIT(A)'] for assessment year 2015-16. The grounds raised by the assessee reproduced as under: GROUND NO. I: DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT R.W.R 8D(2)(iii) of the INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 ("the Rules"): 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case ... that the AO be directed to delete the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUNDS I & III: GROUND NO. IV: NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT CAN BE MADE WHEN SECURITIES ARE HELD AS STOCK-IN- TRADE: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case

Yokogawa India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Large Taxpayers Unit, Bangalore

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

ITA 2088/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14A

accepting the claim of the Appellant that only Rs. 1,90,461/- has been incurred for earning the exempt income and hence the disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to Rs.1,90,461/- 15. The Learned AO and DRP has erred in not following the method as described under ... Learned AO has erred in not following the directions of the Hon'ble DRP for re-computation of the amount of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D and by considering the amount of Rs. 13,910.05 lakhs for the purpose of formula prescribed under rule

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) (1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1646/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) (1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Intas Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1645/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Intas Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1644/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1336/AHD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1335/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Accordingly the claim of expenditure is allowed as revenue

ITA 1334/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta& Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CI

given in Ground No. 3 of the Department’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10. Ground No. 5 (Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting disallowance under Section 14A amounting to Rs. 5,53,94,595/-) 64. The brief facts in relation to this ground of appeal are that the Assessing Officer ... worked out a disallowance under Section 14A of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,07,22,166/- which includes the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) at Rs. 4,89,00,633/- and administrative expenses under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at Rs. 1,18,21,533/-. Since, the assessee himself

D.C.I.T., CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Navin Construction & Credit Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 580/KOL/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, D/R
Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 68

Assessing Officer exceeded his jurisdiction provided for limited scrutiny by disallowing the claim of scientific research expenditure u/s 35(1)(ii) and disallowance under section 14A of the Act. This Tribunal in the case of Tirumani Investment Private Limited (supra), has dealt with this issue and held as under

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax -8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Welspun Global Brands Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2182/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Miss. Padmavathy S.() Ι.Τ.Α. No.2073/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/S Welspun Global Brands Ltd Vs 9Th Floor, Welspun House, Kmala Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 Pan: Aabcb5226F Appellant Dcit-8(3)(2), Mumbai Respondent Ι.Τ.Α. Νο.2182/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax-8(3)(1), Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Room No.615 M.K. Road, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400 020 Appellant Vs M/S Welspun Global Brands Ltd 9Th Floor, Welspun House, Kmala Mill Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 Pan: Aabcb5226F Respondent Present For The Assessee Shri. Percy Pardiwala, Ld.Sr.Counsel Alongwith Harsh Kapadia, Ca Present For The Department Shri. Nihar Samal, Ld. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 24/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 31/01/2024 2

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

whereby the additions of Rs.10,02,14,721/- and Rs. 6,17,03,974/- were made respectively on account of TP adjustment and disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 9. The Assessee challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee

Welspun Global Brands Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 2073/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Miss. Padmavathy S.()

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

whereby the additions of Rs.10,02,14,721/- and Rs. 6,17,03,974/- were made respectively on account of TP adjustment and disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 9. The Assessee challenged the assessment order before the Ld. Commissioner, who partly allowed the appeal of the Assessee

The Dy. CIT Central Cirle-6(4), Mumbai vs. Indiabulls Real Estate Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed in the aforesaid terms and the Petition filed by the Assessee under rule

ITA 4847/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.O.P.Kant () & Narender Kumar Choudhry ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

case, Ld. Commissioner, New Delhi, vide impugned order allowed the appeal of the Assessee in part, by determining as under: (i) Restricted the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D of the I.T. Rules, 1962 to the extent of Rs.1,18,44,320/- as against the sum of Rs.5

ACIT-Circle-5(3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2426/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

assessee under sub-clause (1), no further disallowance was warranted under sub-clause (iii) of clause (2) of Rule 8D. Hence, the aggregate disallowance under Section 14A was computed at Rs.1,17,99,604.  The assessee filed the revised working of the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act during ... assessment proceedings as certain investments were inadvertently considered as yielding exempt dividend income when filing the Return of Income, whereby the aggregate disallowance under Section 14A of the Act was computed at Rs. 1,14,95,165/-. 5. However, the ld. AO did not accept the assessee’s computation

The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle 5(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 1795/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

assessee under sub-clause (1), no further disallowance was warranted under sub-clause (iii) of clause (2) of Rule 8D. Hence, the aggregate disallowance under Section 14A was computed at Rs.1,17,99,604. • The assessee filed the revised working of the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act during ... assessment proceedings as certain investments were inadvertently considered as yielding exempt dividend income when filing the Return of Income, whereby the aggregate disallowance under Section 14A of the Act was computed at Rs. 1,14,95,165/-. 5. However, the ld. AO did not accept the assessee's computation