← 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

Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, this ground is allowed

ITA 793/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.B Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 194HSection 40

been fulfilled ? (2) Whether the learned CIT(A) was correct in law and in facts in holding that no I disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made because no exempt income has been earned during the year? (3) Whether the learned CIT(A) was correct ... income from these investments are not form part of the total income of the assessee. The assessee was asked as to why the disallowance u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D should not be made. In response, the assessee submitted that the assessee has not incurred any expenditure in respect of earning

B.Shanthilal Choudry, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw - 6(3), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 3109/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri J. Prabhakar (C.A)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 31-10-2018. The sole grievance of the assessee is disallowance u/s 14A. 2. The registry has noted a delay of 15 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR. Considering ... submitted that the assessee debited expenditure under capital account and Ld. AO, without recording any objective satisfaction, could not have made any disallowance u/s 14A. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, supported the additions. Having considered rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. 4. The assessee

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 2550/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 45

14A comes into play only in the case of investment, income from which, is completely exempt from tax. Hence the question of any disallowance u/s 14A in respect of interest paid on loans, which are utilised to make the investment, is to be allowed as a business expenditure ... nature of dividend which is an exempt income for taxation in which case the interest expenditure on the investment should be disallowed u/s 14A of the Income tax Act. The CIT(A) did not address the argument raised by the assessee that premium on redemption of preference shares is taxable

M/S. Enzen Global Solutions Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2(1)(4), Banglaoore

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

ITA 2332/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sappeal Nos. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 45

14A comes into play only in the case of investment, income from which, is completely exempt from tax. Hence the question of any disallowance u/s 14A in respect of interest paid on loans, which are utilised to make the investment, is to be allowed as a business expenditure ... nature of dividend which is an exempt income for taxation in which case the interest expenditure on the investment should be disallowed u/s 14A of the Income tax Act. The CIT(A) did not address the argument raised by the assessee that premium on redemption of preference shares is taxable

M/S. Harman Connected Services Corporation India Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2243/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Biju, M.K., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80GSection 92C

Ground No.9 : Restriction of depreciation on computer server and networking equipment to the extent of 15%. (iii) Ground No.10: Disallowance u/s. 14A. (iv) Ground No.11 : Non-grant of deduction u/s. 80G of the Act. (v) Ground No.12: MAT credit being not granted. (vi) Ground No.13 : Short credit ... delayed receivables. The AO passed a draft assessment order incorporating the TP adjustment and further made disallowance towards depreciation on networking equipments and disallowance u/s. 14A. The assessee raised its objections before the DRP. The DRP gave a marginal relief by reducing the disallowance u/s. 14A. The AO passed

M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Ltu Circle-1, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1629/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14 Bosch Limited, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Hosur Road, Adugodi, Of Income Tax, Ltu, Bangalore – 560 030. Circle 1, Pan: Aaacm 9840P Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Percy Pardiwala, Advocate Respondent By : Shri V S Chakrapani, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S.2. This Appeal Is Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals), Bangalore-9, Bangalore Dated 31.3.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013- 14. 3. The Assessee Raised Grounds Pertaining To The Following Issues:- Deduction U/S. 35(2Ab) Computed On Net Expenditure As Opposed To Gross Expenditure Disallowance Of Provision For Bad & Doubtful Debts I) Disallowance Of Provision For Long Term Service Award Disallowance Of Expenditure U/S. 14A Of The Act Ii) Page 2 Of 67

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 35Section 37Section 43BSection 80J

value of investments, it should be Page 21 of 67 considered that investments have been made out of interest free funds and no disallowance u/s. 14A towards any interest expenditure can be made. This view was again confirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. HDFC Bank ... substantial question of law would arise for consideration as canvassed.” 39. Therefore, by placing reliance on the above judgment we hold that disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii) is not warranted in the facts of the instant given case. It is ordered accordingly. 40. With regard

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 46 (Now DCIT - CC -8(3), Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 6756/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r Rule 8D(2)(iii) made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A ... Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules and by following the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11/02/2014 wherein it had been held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D can be even made when the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year." M/s. Rosy Blue (India

DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3) Erstwhile DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, Mumbai vs. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 4096/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r Rule 8D(2)(iii) made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A ... Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules and by following the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11/02/2014 wherein it had been held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D can be even made when the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year." M/s. Rosy Blue (India

DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3) Erstwhile DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, Mumbai vs. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 4094/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r Rule 8D(2)(iii) made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A ... Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules and by following the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11/02/2014 wherein it had been held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D can be even made when the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year." M/s. Rosy Blue (India

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, (Now DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3)), Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 3680/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r Rule 8D(2)(iii) made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A ... Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules and by following the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11/02/2014 wherein it had been held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D can be even made when the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year." M/s. Rosy Blue (India

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. - 46, (Now DCIT Cent. Cir. 8(3)), Mumbai

In the result, revenues appeal are dismissed and assessee/s appeal are allowed

ITA 3679/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 153A

Whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r Rule 8D(2)(iii) made by the Assessing Officer to Rs. 60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A ... Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules and by following the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11/02/2014 wherein it had been held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D can be even made when the assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year." M/s. Rosy Blue (India

Titan Industries Limited, Hosur vs. JCIT, Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2239/CHNY/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana (Sr. Advocate) for Ms. Manasa Ananthan (Advocate) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. S. Palani Kumar (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92A(1)

issues to be adjudicated are – (i) Transfer Pricing Adjustment of notional interest on advances; (ii) Transfer Pricing Addition of Royalty on Sales; (iii) Disallowance u/s 14A; (iv) Disallowance of loans written- off; (v) Apportionment of Expenses including depreciation on trademark to compute deduction u/s 80-IC; (vi) Nature of Application ... irretrievable loss. We find that no such issue arises from the order of lower authorities and accordingly, this ground is not admitted. 5. Disallowance u/s 14A 5.1 The assessee earned exempt income of Rs.5.05 Lacs and offered suo-motu disallowance of Rs.5,750/- in the return of income. However

Toyota Tsusho India Private Limited, Ramanagara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 175/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice Preseident & Shri Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Darpan Kriplani, CAFor Respondent: Shri V S Chakrapani, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised 13 grounds pertaining to TP adjustment and grounds 14 to 16 are with regard to disallowance u/s. 14A of the SP No.12/B/2022 & IT(TP)A No.175/B/2022 Page 2 of 15 Act. Ground No.17 is general. The assessee has also raised additional grounds ... adjustment of Rs.43,03,79,111. Consequently the AO passed the draft assessment order dated 13.4.2021 incorporating the TP adjustment and also made disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act for an amount of Rs.1,03,81,258 and disallowance towards R&D expenditure of Rs.36,000. 6. Aggrieved the assessee

Chatwani and Shah Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Central Circle(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1482/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: The Tribunal.

Section 14A

provisions of rule 8D should not be applied in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, in A.Y. 2013-14, the Tribunal determined the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act to 10% of the dividend income earned by the assessee. The Learned AR submitted that facts are still better

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 217/CHNY/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

section 14A. As is evident, two issue arises for our consideration – (i) interest disallowance invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2); (ii) disallowance u/s 14A. The same are adjudicated as under. 2. The appeal is in second round of appeal since the matter, in the first round, was remitted back ... shall mutatis mutandis apply to these years also. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee in these years stand allowed. 4. Disallowance u/s 14A 4.1 The Ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A since the entire expenditure claimed was with respect to assessee’s investments only. The Ld. AO considered

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 216/CHNY/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

section 14A. As is evident, two issue arises for our consideration – (i) interest disallowance invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2); (ii) disallowance u/s 14A. The same are adjudicated as under. 2. The appeal is in second round of appeal since the matter, in the first round, was remitted back ... shall mutatis mutandis apply to these years also. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee in these years stand allowed. 4. Disallowance u/s 14A 4.1 The Ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A since the entire expenditure claimed was with respect to assessee’s investments only. The Ld. AO considered

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 215/CHNY/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

section 14A. As is evident, two issue arises for our consideration – (i) interest disallowance invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2); (ii) disallowance u/s 14A. The same are adjudicated as under. 2. The appeal is in second round of appeal since the matter, in the first round, was remitted back ... shall mutatis mutandis apply to these years also. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee in these years stand allowed. 4. Disallowance u/s 14A 4.1 The Ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A since the entire expenditure claimed was with respect to assessee’s investments only. The Ld. AO considered

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 214/CHNY/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

section 14A. As is evident, two issue arises for our consideration – (i) interest disallowance invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2); (ii) disallowance u/s 14A. The same are adjudicated as under. 2. The appeal is in second round of appeal since the matter, in the first round, was remitted back ... shall mutatis mutandis apply to these years also. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee in these years stand allowed. 4. Disallowance u/s 14A 4.1 The Ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A since the entire expenditure claimed was with respect to assessee’s investments only. The Ld. AO considered

Millennium Alcobev Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - IV (3), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 213/CHNY/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Sept 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)

section 14A. As is evident, two issue arises for our consideration – (i) interest disallowance invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2); (ii) disallowance u/s 14A. The same are adjudicated as under. 2. The appeal is in second round of appeal since the matter, in the first round, was remitted back ... shall mutatis mutandis apply to these years also. The corresponding grounds raised by the assessee in these years stand allowed. 4. Disallowance u/s 14A 4.1 The Ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A since the entire expenditure claimed was with respect to assessee’s investments only. The Ld. AO considered

Maharashtra Steels Rolling Mills P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-35, Mumbai

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

ITA 5058/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Pramod Parida/Ms. KiranFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair (Sr. AR)
Section 14A

cost of investments (Rs.21.13 crores). But, as noted earlier, the total exempt income earned was Rs.7,92,176/-. According to us, the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income. Useful reference in this regard may be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High ... case of Joint Investments (P) Ltd Vs CIT reported in 372 ITR 694. Following the same, the AO is directed to restrict the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of Rs.7,92,176/- and delete the balance sum. Ground No. 1 is therefore partly allowed. 4 A.Y. 2011-12 Maharashtra