← 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

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

ITA 296/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

ITA 295/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

ITA 275/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

ITA 274/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

DCIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi vs. Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi

ITA 273/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

Neel Metal Products Ltd (Formely Known As Neel Auto Pvt Ltd), New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi

ITA 240/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

Neel Metal Products Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi

ITA 239/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

Neel Metal Products Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi

ITA 238/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

Neel Metal Products Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle-25, New Delhi

ITA 232/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr.AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty

made in AY 2013-14, ITA 232 for AY 2013-14 (appeal of assessee) Issue no. 5 is with regard to Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee by the CIT(A) and Revenue ... aforesaid discussion, issue no. 3 is allowed in favour of the assessee no. 1. 19. Issue no. 4 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, in AY 2015-16 onwards to AY 2018-19. The issue is decided in favour of assessee

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-6(1), Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd (Now Known As Prism Johnson Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 908/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Prism Cement Ltd. Income Tax Central (Now Known As Prism Circle- 6(1) Johnson Ltd) 19Th Floor, Air India 2Nd Floor, Raheja, Main Building, Nariman Point, Avenue, V.P. Road, Maharashtra – 400021 Santacruz West Maharashtra - 400054 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacp6224A Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Smt. Madhumalti Ghosh
Section 143(3)Section 14A

case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s 14A by holding that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income by ignoring the CBDT circular no 5/2014 which is clarificatory in nature?" 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ... securities amounting to Rs.3,47,25,00,000/- which generated exempt income during the year under consideration. Therefore, the assessing officer has computed disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D to the amount of Rs.22,05,00,000/- and added to the total income of the assessee. 3. The assessee filed

M/S. Plaza Agencies Pvt Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 527/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Sunaina Bhatia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

interpretations, the Finance Act of 2022 effective from 01.04.2022 introduced a crucial clarificatory amendment by inserting explanation to section 14A clarifying that the disallowance u/s. 14A shall be applicable even where no exempt income is earned during the year. The explanation uses the phrase “and shall be deemed to have ... future which is not “includable” in total income, these investment have to be reckoned for the purpose of computing the amount of disallowance u/s. 14A as the disallowance u/s. 14A is not related to the amount of exempt income earned during the year. Accordingly, the Page 5 of 13 Ld.CIT

DCIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi vs. Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4271/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14 Dcit, Vs Jmw India Pvt. Ltd., Circle-13(2), 309, Vikas Deep Building, New Delhi. Laxmi Nagar, District Centre, Delhi. – 110 092. Pan: Aaacj3260C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri C.S. Anand, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Parul Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.06.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.07.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 08.03.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No. Del/Cit(A)-5/0368/2016-17 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Orders Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Dcit, Circle-13(2), New Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao). 2. Heard & Perused The Record. The Ld. Dr Submitted That The Order Of The Cit(A) Is Erroneous As Without Examining The Use Of Subsidy Amount Reliance Was Placed On The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court In The Case Of Shri Balaji Alloys & Others, 333 Itr 335 (J&K). It Was Submitted That The Cit(A) Was Supposed To Examine The Question Of Utilization Of The Subsidy In The Light Of The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Limited, 306 Itr 392 (Sc). The Ld. Ar, However, Relied The Order Of The Cit(A) & Submitted That The Cit(A) Has Not Taken Into Consideration The Judgement Of The Hon’Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Sahney Steel & Press Works Limited Vs. Cit (1997) 228 Itr 253 (Sc).

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Parul Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

business of trading and manufacturing copper products and the return was taken up for scrutiny and apart from examining the issue of disallowance u/s 14A, a disallowance on unvouched expenses was made for which the assessee came before the CIT(A) wherein, apart from challenging the aforesaid additions, an additional

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle - 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Radha Madhav Investments Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3341/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2017-18
Section 10Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

computation of income, the assessee has disallowed Rs. 8,16,949/– and depository charges of Rs. 23,382/– as suo–moto disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. The assessee company was found to have computed the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act @ 1% of the annual average of monthly averages ... Radha Madhav Investments Pvt. Ltd. Act, assessee has suo-moto offered an amount of Rs. 8,16,949/- as expenditure disallowable u/s. 14A of the Act and also disallowed depository charges of Rs. 23,382/- as direct expenditure but, according to assessee, incurred for trading business and for maintaining corporate

Asst CIT Cir 25(3), Mumbai vs. Nailesh S. Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is treated as Partly Allowed

ITA 4847/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.4847/Mum/2017 (ननधधारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) बनधम/ Acit-25(3) Nailesh S Mehta Room No. 601, C-10, 6Th 102, Hiralaya, Plot No. 19, Jvpd Vs. Floor, Pratyakshakar Scheme Vile Parle (W), Mumbai- Bhavan, Bandra Kurla 400056. Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. स्थधयीलेखधसं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aczpm0898D (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Sumat Chadha Revenue By: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, Cit-Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01/07/2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 04/07/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per B R Baskaran, Am: The Appeal Of The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05- 04-2017 Passed By Ld Cit(A)-37, Mumbai & It Relates To The Assessment Year 2012-13. Following Issues Are Urged In This Appeal:- (A) Whether The Ld Cit(A) Was Right In Holding That The Compensation Received On Cancellation Of Flats Booked By The Assessee Is Genuine Business Income & Not Cash Credit Representing Accommodation Entry, Which Is Assessable As Income Of The Assessee Under The Head Income From Other Sources. (B) Whether The Ld Cit(A) Was Right In Deleting The Disallowance Made By The Ao U/S 14A Of The Act Read With Rule 8D Of I T Rules. (C) Whether The Decision Rendered By Ld Cit(A) In Respect Of Profits Generated In Commodity Derivatives & Loss Incurred In Trading In Futures & Option Is Correct.

For Appellant: Shri Sumat ChadhaFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade, CIT-DR
Section 14A

next issue relates to the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act. The AO noticed that the assessee did not make any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Accordingly, he computed disallowance as per Rule 8D of I T Rules at Rs.37,58,008/- and added the same ... assessee contended that the AO did not record any dissatisfaction on the stand taken by the assessee on the matter of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Accordingly, it was contended that the AO could not have computed the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D without recording dissatisfaction

Super Sales India Limited, Coimbatore vs. ITO, Corp Ward 2, Coimbatore

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 501/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.501/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Super Sales India Limited Ito बनाम/ 34-A, Kamaraj Road, Corporate Ward-2 Vs. Coimbatore-641 018. Coimbatore. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aadcs-0650-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R.Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)- Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan(Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-06-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-07-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri R.Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan(Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30-12-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D(2) for Rs.5.83 Lacs. 2. The assessee earned exempt dividend income of Rs.71.79 Lacs but did not offer any disallowance u/s 14A

The Ramco Cements Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2196/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

results in creation of asset for a third party of which the assessee is not the owner shall be regarded as revenue expenditure. Disallowance u/s 14A_r.w Rule 8D-Rs 91,54,895 14. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.91 ... opportunity to the Appellant 17. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred, in facts and law, in adjudicating on the issue of applying the disallowance u/s 14A for re-computation of Book Profits since no such re-computation of Book profits was made by the AO and consequently no such ground

Parry Infrastructure Co P Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1653/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Philip George, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

forming part of the assets from which income is earned cannot be enhanced. He narrated the following three enhancements:- i) Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 2,87,984/- ii) Disallowance as discussed as in Para No.2 Rs. 1,66,86,000/- iii) Provision as discussed as in Para

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai vs. The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 1897/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

results in creation of asset for a third party of which the assessee is not the owner shall be regarded as revenue expenditure. Disallowance u/s 14A_r.w Rule 8D-Rs 91,54,895 14. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.91 ... opportunity to the Appellant 17. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred, in facts and law, in adjudicating on the issue of applying the disallowance u/s 14A for re-computation of Book Profits since no such re-computation of Book profits was made by the AO and consequently no such ground

The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 958/CHNY/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

results in creation of asset for a third party of which the assessee is not the owner shall be regarded as revenue expenditure. Disallowance u/s 14A_r.w Rule 8D-Rs 91,54,895 14. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.91 ... opportunity to the Appellant 17. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred, in facts and law, in adjudicating on the issue of applying the disallowance u/s 14A for re-computation of Book Profits since no such re-computation of Book profits was made by the AO and consequently no such ground

The Ramco Cements Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 957/CHNY/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.957/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.958/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 3. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2196/Chny/2019 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Ramco Cements Limited Dcit बनाम (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Corporate Circle -2, Ramamandiram, / Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) & 4. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1274/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 5. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1363/Chny/2016 (िनधा;रण वष; / Assessment Year: 2012-13) & 6. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1897/Chny/2017 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit The Ramco Cements Limited बनाम/ Corporate Circle -2, (Formerly Known As Madras Cements Ltd) Ramamandiram, Vs. Madurai. Rajapalayam-626 117. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcm-8375-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.Prabhakar (CA) &For Respondent: Mrs. Jothi Lakshmi Nayak (CIT)-Ld.DR

results in creation of asset for a third party of which the assessee is not the owner shall be regarded as revenue expenditure. Disallowance u/s 14A_r.w Rule 8D-Rs 91,54,895 14. The Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.91 ... opportunity to the Appellant 17. The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred, in facts and law, in adjudicating on the issue of applying the disallowance u/s 14A for re-computation of Book Profits since no such re-computation of Book profits was made by the AO and consequently no such ground