← All Phrases

“disallowance u/s 14A”

DisallowancesSection 14ASection 14A2,938 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance u/s 14A is CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. (223 Taxmann 130), cited in 579 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance u/s 14A

CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd.
223 Taxmann 130 · 2014 · High Court
579
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is not warranted if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

CIT v. Gem Plus Jewellery India Ltd.
330 ITR 175 · 2011 · High Court
207
citing judgments

Disallowances made under various sections, such as for PF/ESIC contributions, result in an increase in business profits, and these enhanced profits are eligible for deduction under Sections 10A and 10AA. Similarly, gains from foreign exchange fluctuations directly linked to export sales are also eligible for deduction under Section 10A.

Cargo Motors (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
145 Taxmann.com 641 · 2022 · High Court
46
citing judgments

The disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, particularly Rule 8D(iii) for administrative expenses, should only consider investments that have actually yielded exempt income during the relevant assessment year. Section 14A empowers the Assessing Officer to determine expenditure related to income not forming part of total income.

Sobha Developers Ltd. v. DCIT
125 Taxmann.com 72 · 2021 · High Court
44
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A is a notional disallowance and cannot be added back while computing Book Profits under section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax purposes.

Tata Industries Ltd. v. ITO
181 TTJ 600 · 2016 · ITAT
29
citing judgments

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.

PCIT v. J.J. Glastronics (P.) Ltd.
139 Taxmann.com 375 · 2022 · High Court
28
citing judgments

Additions made under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, read with Rule 8D, cannot be considered for computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act.

M/s.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ACIT
38 DTR 282 · 2010 · Reported
26
citing judgments

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act is not applicable to insurance businesses governed by specific provisions of Section 44 and Schedule 1. Profit on sale of investments by insurance companies is not taxable, especially after the deletion of sub-rule (b) of Rule 5 of the First Schedule.

PCIT v. Dipesh Lalchand Shah
143 Taxmann.com 419 · 2022 · High Court
18
citing judgments

Disallowance under section 14A cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year. This applies even if the assessee has made investments in shares or has income from a partnership that is negative.

Judgments citing disallowance u/s 14A

Cnh Industrial (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Centre Circle 6(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1890/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Cnh Industrial (Ind) Pvt. Ltd Level04, Rectangle-1, D4 Acit, Central Circle 6(3) District Center, Commercial Mumbai Vs. Complex Saket, South Delhi, Delhi 110017 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaci3922Q

For Appellant: Shri. Ajit Jain, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Samruddhi Hande, DR
Section 234BSection 92C

Action Construction Equipment Ltd. has functionally different was also upheld. Therefore, Transfer Pricing Adjustment is found to be proper. iii. With respect to disallowance u/s 14A of the Ld. DRP noted that the assessee does not have any exempt income, however, the objection of the assessee was rejected ... respectfully following the decision of co- ordinate bench, in assesse’s own case, is allowed. 19. Ground no. 6 is with respect to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act made of Rs 2,22,85,300/-. The facts clearly show that assessee has not earned any exempt income during

Brassco Estate P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-30, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 6966/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmabrassco Estate P. Ltd. Vs. Acit 63, Ugf, World Trade Central Circle – 30 Centre, Near Lalit Hotel, New Delhi Connaught Place, New Delhi- 110 001 Pan No. Aaacb 4988 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By -None- Revenue By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 09.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24

appellant has agreed that some expenditure needs to be disallowed. 4.7 In the return of income, the appellant had not made any disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D. The assessing officer, vide order dated 26.12.2016 arrived at a disallowance of Rs.22,53,600/-. 4.7.1 The total expenditure claimed in return ... Taxable Income 9272028 46.66 1770548 2. Exempt/dividend 10601000 53.34 2024324 Income 19873028 100% 3794872 As worked out by the appellant Disallowance u/s 14A 2,24,324 Disallowance computation 1541272 Balance to be disallowed 483052 4.7.3 I find that the disallowance of Rs. 15,41,272/-, made by the appellant, consisted

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Srinagar vs. M/S Trumbo Cement Industries Private Limited, Srinagar

In the result, the Ground no-1 of the Revenue for ITA No

ITA 124/ASR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)(va)Section 250Section 36Section 43BSection 68

erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 60,38,701/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of disallowance u/s 14A. As the A.O has observed that the assessee has utilized business funds for share application money and there was no close proximity to the business of the assessee ... argued that the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the addition amount of Rs.60,38,701/- in relation to disallowance u/s 14A for utilisation of business fund I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2020 7 I.T.A. No.124/Asr/2020 for share application money. The assessee company is utilising the tax-free fund and the share application money cannot

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3, Srinagar vs. M/S Trumbo Cement Industries Private Limited, Srinagar

In the result, the Ground no-1 of the Revenue for ITA No

ITA 123/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)(va)Section 250Section 36Section 43BSection 68

erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 60,38,701/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of disallowance u/s 14A. As the A.O has observed that the assessee has utilized business funds for share application money and there was no close proximity to the business of the assessee ... argued that the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the addition amount of Rs.60,38,701/- in relation to disallowance u/s 14A for utilisation of business fund I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2020 7 I.T.A. No.124/Asr/2020 for share application money. The assessee company is utilising the tax-free fund and the share application money cannot

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Idbi Bank Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2937/MUM/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit- 3(4) V. M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1 Central Processing Unit (Tds) World Trade Center, Cuffe Parade Plot No. 82/83, Elemach Bldg Mumbai- 400005 Road No. 7, Street No. 15 Midc, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd V. Acit/Dcit-Ltu 22Nd Floor, Idbi Tower 29Th Floor, Centre No. 1 Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai- 400005 Mumbai- 400005 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 18

issue in dispute, accordingly, ground raised by the revenue is dismissed. 8. With regard to Ground No. 2 which is in respect of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act, Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and submitted as under: - “The AO disallowed the expenses amounting ... misapplication of case Laws by the Ld. AO and misappreciation of facts of the case and directed to be deleted. With respect to disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D is added with Book profit nder u/s 115JB of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance. Arguments of the department

Unilever India Exports Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, -CC 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed

ITA 2108/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234BSection 270A

coordinate bench and therefore respectfully following the same we direct the AO/TPO to delete the addition made towards inter group services. 16. Disallowance u/s 14A (Grounds 8 & 9) 16.1 The assessing officer noticed from the financial of the assessee that the assessee had made substantial investment where from the income ... total income in A.Y 2017-18 at the time of filing income tax return. In this connection, it is submitted that the expenses disallowable u/s 14A of the Act do not limit only to the proportionate salaries of one or two persons. There is a larger environment consisting of Board

Unilever India Exports Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT - Central Circle - 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 and 2018-19 are allowed

ITA 2107/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234BSection 270A

coordinate bench and therefore respectfully following the same we direct the AO/TPO to delete the addition made towards inter group services. 16. Disallowance u/s 14A (Grounds 8 & 9) 16.1 The assessing officer noticed from the financial of the assessee that the assessee had made substantial investment where from the income ... total income in A.Y 2017-18 at the time of filing income tax return. In this connection, it is submitted that the expenses disallowable u/s 14A of the Act do not limit only to the proportionate salaries of one or two persons. There is a larger environment consisting of Board

Dy Comm of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai vs. Kosmo One Business Park Pvt Ltd., Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, being devoid of any merits

ITA 627/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhvk-Vk-La- 627@Eaqcbz@2023 ¼Fu-Oa- 2018&19½ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, 6 (4) Room No.1925, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Mumbai-400 021 Cuke Vs. Kosmo One Business Park Private Limited M-62 & 63, 1St Floor, Cannaught Place, New Delhi-110 001 ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Pan No. Aabci4397L

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Ranjan, Sr. AR izfroknh }kjk@For Respondent: Shri K. Gopal, Advocate
Section 14A

addition u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). The CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act on the ground that disallowance cannot exceed exempt income earned. The CIT(A) while deciding the issue has failed to take ... operates retrospectively. 3. Per contra, Shri K. Gopal appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that it is a settled law that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot exceed exempt income earned. Insofar as the amendment introduced by the Finance Act, 2022, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court

Skg Engineering Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 23(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1293/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Skg Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Gripwel House, Block-5, Circle 23(2), Sector-C 6&7, New Delhi. Lsc Vasant Kunj, New Delhi – 110 070. Pan: Aaacs3743F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.T. Panda, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.05.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.1293/Del/2021 For Ay 2017-18 Arises Out Of The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, In Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021-22/1034916910(1) Dated 17.08.2021 [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 12.12.2019 By The Ld. Income-Tax Officer, Circle 23(2), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’).

For Appellant: Shri A.T. Panda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

Rs.7,78,022/- and other expenses – RYM – amounting to Rs.96,327/-. The ld. DR submitted that this sum would certainly have to be disallowed u/s 14A of the Act. We are unable to comprehend ourselves to agree to this contention of the ld. DR in view of the fact that ... that the ld. AO had directly resorted to applying the computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D of the Rules and proceeded to make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The disallowance made in this manner would have no legs to stand in the eyes of law. This view is further

Ptc India Financial Services Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(1) & (2), New Delhi

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

ITA 5051/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 14A

facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.16,77,36,896/-.” 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- “1. That the order passed by the CIT(A) upholding ... loss) booked under head Rs.9,81,86,182 Foreign Exchange loss (iii) Disallowance for non-deduction of TDS Rs. 53,99,200 (iv) Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.17,11,94,055 5. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A) who deleted the disallowances on account

M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4985/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 May 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. Kipgen, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 14A

facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.16,77,36,896/-.” 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee read as under :- “1. That the order passed by the CIT(A) upholding ... loss) booked under head Rs.9,81,86,182 Foreign Exchange loss (iii) Disallowance for non-deduction of TDS Rs. 53,99,200 (iv) Disallowance u/s 14A Rs.17,11,94,055 5. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee appealed before the ld. CIT(A) who deleted the disallowances on account

Diva Exports Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 9(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3218/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 271(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

expenses - Rs. 77,870/- (3) Disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) - Rs. 1,36,490/- (4) Interest of TDS - Rs. 595/- (5) Disallowance u/s 14A - Rs. 2,53,437/-. Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) gave partial relief with

Karun Carpets (P) Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addi. CIT Spl. Range- 05, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4299/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 Karun Carpets (P) Ltd., Vs Addl. Cit, 801-803, Tower-B, Spl. Range-05, Global Business Park, New Delhi. Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaack2331D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri G.S. Grewal, Ca; Ms Harsimran Grewal, Ca & Shri Jaspal Singh, Ca Revenue By : Ms Sapna Bhatia, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.4299/Del/2019 For Ay 2015-16 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, New Delhi, [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] In Appeal No.13/18-19 Dated 19.02.2019 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 29.11.2017 By The Ld. Income-Tax Officer, Special Range-5, New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’). 2. The Only Issue On Merits To Be Decided In This Appeal Is As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Restricting The Disallowance U/S 14A Of The Act To Rs 19,71,549/- In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Grewal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Sapna Bhatia, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

only issue on merits to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act to Rs 19,71,549/- in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. We have heard the rival submissions

Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 8(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2116/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh Shah a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kumar
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 801ASection 80I

without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 9) The Hon'ble DRP has also erred in confirming the addition of disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D of Rs. 38,26,00,000/- to the amount of book profits calculated u/s Section 115JB, without considering the fact & circumstances

JCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Daawat Foods Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2387/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A
Section 10Section 14A

assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 in ITA. Nos. 5345 to 5348/Del/2018 dated 22.10.2021 deleted the disallowance observing as under:- “Disallowance U/S 14A : 9. The assessee, during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, received income amounting to Rs.2,03,13,535/- as share ... deleted. Ground number 17 is accordingly allowed." 12. In view of the aforesaid, it was submitted that there was no warrant to make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in the case of the assessee. 13. It was also submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in assessee

Dawat Foods Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1758/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Deepashree Rao, C.A
Section 10Section 14A

assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15 in ITA. Nos. 5345 to 5348/Del/2018 dated 22.10.2021 deleted the disallowance observing as under:- “Disallowance U/S 14A : 9. The assessee, during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, received income amounting to Rs.2,03,13,535/- as share ... deleted. Ground number 17 is accordingly allowed." 12. In view of the aforesaid, it was submitted that there was no warrant to make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in the case of the assessee. 13. It was also submitted that the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in assessee

ACIT.Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 10(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tata Consultancy Services Ltd (Successor Company to M/S Cmc Limited), Mumbai

Accordingly the same is dismissed

ITA 6824/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T.Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/I.T.A.No.6824/Mum/2011 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of बिधम M/S Tata Consultancy Income Tax-10 (1) Services Ltd (Successor Vs. 455, Aayakar Bhavan, 4Th Company To M/S Cmc Floor, M.K. Marg, Ltd.) Mumbai-400 020 9Th Floor, Nirmal Building Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 स्थधयीलेखधसं/.जी. आइ. आर. सं/.Pan/Gir No: .Aaacc2030K .. अपीलार्थी प्रत्यर्थी / Appellant / Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Harsh Kothari
Section 10A

erred in directing the Assessing Officer to consider interest expenditure of Rs.7,32,000/- only & for working out disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing Assessing Officer to exclude investments of Rs.8.18 ... dismissed. 23. Ground no. 2 and 3 are against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) directing the AO to re-compute the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in accordance with the directions set out in the appellate order. 24. Brief facts are that, during the relevant year

Shri Girishkumar Vachhraj Dholakia, Junagadh vs. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee(s) are dismissed

ITA 15/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot02 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 14/Rjt/2021 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Shri Jugalkishore Natwarlal Pr. Commissioner Of Dholakia, Vs Income-Tax, C/O. Chokshi Vachhraj Makanji & Pcit-1, Rajkot Co., Shishumangal Road, Gandhigram, Junagadh-362001 Pan : Abqpd 2710 D आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 15/Rjt/2021 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Shri Girishkumar Vachhraj Pr. Commissioner Of Dholakia, Vs Income-Tax, C/O. Chokshi Vachhraj Makanji & Pcit-1, Rajkot Co., Shishumangal Road, Gandhigram, Junagadh-362001 Pan : Abupd 6245 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Jani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy:-

For Appellant: Shri Samir Jani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(iii)

also considering that most of funds have been utilized to invest in companies/firms which have potential to earn exempted income, a disallowance u/s 14A r.w.s. 36(1 )(iii) of the Act was required to have been made. However no such disallowance is made while passing the assessment order. The disallowance ... 404/27,77,47,357 = 7,20,056/- (iii) one half percent of B i.e. 0.5 % of 17,54,10,404/- = 8,77,052/-/- Disallowance u/s 14A r.w. rule 8D = (i)+ (ii)+ (iii) = 0+ 7,20,056 + 8,77,052 = 15,97,108/- ITA Nos. 14 & 15/Rjt/2021 Assessee : Jugalkishore N Dholakia

Shri Jugalkishore Natwarlal Dholakia, Junagadh vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee(s) are dismissed

ITA 14/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot02 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 14/Rjt/2021 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Shri Jugalkishore Natwarlal Pr. Commissioner Of Dholakia, Vs Income-Tax, C/O. Chokshi Vachhraj Makanji & Pcit-1, Rajkot Co., Shishumangal Road, Gandhigram, Junagadh-362001 Pan : Abqpd 2710 D आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 15/Rjt/2021 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 Shri Girishkumar Vachhraj Pr. Commissioner Of Dholakia, Vs Income-Tax, C/O. Chokshi Vachhraj Makanji & Pcit-1, Rajkot Co., Shishumangal Road, Gandhigram, Junagadh-362001 Pan : Abupd 6245 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Jani, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01/05/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 02/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy:-

For Appellant: Shri Samir Jani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 263Section 36(1)(iii)

also considering that most of funds have been utilized to invest in companies/firms which have potential to earn exempted income, a disallowance u/s 14A r.w.s. 36(1 )(iii) of the Act was required to have been made. However no such disallowance is made while passing the assessment order. The disallowance ... 404/27,77,47,357 = 7,20,056/- (iii) one half percent of B i.e. 0.5 % of 17,54,10,404/- = 8,77,052/-/- Disallowance u/s 14A r.w. rule 8D = (i)+ (ii)+ (iii) = 0+ 7,20,056 + 8,77,052 = 15,97,108/- ITA Nos. 14 & 15/Rjt/2021 Assessee : Jugalkishore N Dholakia

Om Prakash Khaitan, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 3714/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharmaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3714/Del/2019 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 बनाम Om Prakash Khaitan Acit Khaitan House, B-1, Vs. Circle 61(1) Defence Colony, New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 14A

Therefore, no further disallowance is to be made. This submission of the assessee was dismissed by the AO who proceeded to compute the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D at Rs.25,59,533/-. Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) but without any success. 4. Before us the Counsel