← 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

Sterling Holiday Resorts Limited (on Behalf of Erstwhile Sterling Holiday Resorts(India) Limited), Mumbai vs. The Pr. CIT-2, Mumbai

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

ITA 3793/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3793/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Sterling Holiday Resorts बिधम/ Pcit-2 Limited (On Behalf Of Room No.344, 3Rd Floor, Vs. Erstwhile Sterling Holiday Aayakar Bhavan, Resorts (India) Limited) Mumbai-400020. Thomas Cook Building, D. N. Road, Fort, Mumbai- 400001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabct7079G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ketan Ved Revenue By: Smt Anne Varghese (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/08/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Action Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-02, Mumbai Dated 25.03.2019 For Assessment Year 2014-15 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”). 2. At The Outset, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That The Only Issue On Which The Ld. Pcit Has Invoked His Revisional Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act Is In Respect Of Following Issues: - (A) Carry Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation For Ay. 2004-5 To 2009-10 Of M/S. Manchanda Resorts Pvt. Ltd. Amounting To Rs.54,29,744/-. (B) Carry Forward Unabsorbed Depreciation For Ay. 2005-06, 2008-09 Of M/S. Sterling Holiday Resorts (I) Ltd., Amounting To Rs.5,51,57,288/-. (C) Carry Forward Business Loss Of M/S. Manchanda Resorts Pvt. Ltd. For Ay. 2009-10 & 2010-11 Amounting To Rs.7,16,96,555/-.”

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Smt Anne Varghese (Sr. AR)
Section 263Section 32(2)Section 72A

Particulars Amount (in Rs.) Addition of deferred income 27,32,21,000 Amortization of deferred stock 1,43,11,433 compensation cost Disallowance u/s 14A 1,02,40,213 Total 29,77,72,646 7. According to Ld. AR, from the aforementioned “assessed income” AO set-off following unabsorbed depreciation ... Decision of the CIT(A) Addition of deferred income Allowed- addition deleted Amortization of deferred stock compensation Allowed- addition deleted cost Disallowance u/s 14A Allowed- addition deleted Unabsorbed depreciation of AY 1997-98 to Allowed 2001-02 not considered Not quantifying the amount of carry forward Prima facie allowed

Bhatia Sons (India) Ltd, Indore vs. The ITO 1(2) Indore, Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 279/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibhatia Sons Ltd Ito-1(2) Bcc House, 8/5 Indore Vs. Manoramaganj Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadcb8947K Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.08.2023

Section 139(1)Section 14A

income. Further the assessee itself disallowed Rs.76,323/- u/s 14A of the Act. The AO asked the assessee to produce working of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act which was submitted by the assesse and reproduced by the assessing officer in the assessment order. The assesse has submitted that further ... disallowance of Rs.17,995/- may be made u/s 14A of the Act. The AO did not accept this working of disallowance u/s 14A submitted by the assesse and made the disallowance of Rs.9,59,301/- u/s 14A and after reducing suo motto disallowance made by the assesse of Rs.76

Thermax Babcock & Wilcox Energy Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1735/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

addition to incorporating the aforesaid adjustments proposed by the TPO, the Assessing Officer proposed an addition of ₹.8,23,254/- as disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and proceeded to pass the draft assessment order dated 18.03.2015 wherein the Assessing Officer had proposed to make additions ... technical know-how 7,60,79,250 2. TP adjustment in relation to reimbursement of salary 1,04,83,885 cost 3. Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act 8,23,254 Total 8,73,86,389 20. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee is in appeal before us raising following

Sicpa India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-23(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Ground No

ITA 9604/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80GSection 80I

making following additions. Gross Total Income as per return :Rs.59,09,18,041/- Add: Provision for leave encashment as discussed : Rs.26,08,537/- Disallowance u/s 14A as discussed :Rs.23,32,900/- Gross Total Income as assessed :Rs.59,58,478/- Less: Deduction under Chapter VIA-- u/s 80G as per return :Rs.92 ... assessee has not pressed ground No.3, accordingly, ground No.3 of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed. 11. Ground No.4 is regarding disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2) (iii) of Rs.23,32,900/-. During the year assessee earned exempt income to Rs.3,68,51,090/- from the debt oriented

Opg Securities Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1885/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2014-15 Opg Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit, Opg House, 4/10, Asaf Ali Road, Spl. Range-7, New Delhi – 110 002. New Delhi. Pan: Aaaco1081C

For Appellant: Ms Somya Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms Raja Rajeswari R, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

relief from the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) sustained the following additions against which assessee is in appeal before us:- a) Disallowance u/s 14A of the Act - Rs 4,65,685 b) Disallowance of interest expenditure - Rs 1,18,53,937 c) Disallowance on account of non-compliance

M/S Avinash Developers Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statical purposes, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 156/RPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.156/Rpr/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ष / / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Avinash Developers Pvt. Vs The Deputy/Assistant Ltd. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Avinash House, Maruti Circle-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) Business Park, G.E. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan No. : Aadca4060E

For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

judgment Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) has held that if there is no exempt income, there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 90CCH ... effect of these decisions is that the disallowance u/s 14A gets restricted to the extent of exempt income, even if the provisions of the section are attracted. In view of the above precedents, which are squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case, we limit the disallowance

Emerson Electric Company (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/Asstt/CIT/ITO, Delhi

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

ITA 555/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Bafna a/wFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Srivastav
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

above, the Ld.AO erred in not appreciating that the Appellant has not earned any exempt income during the year and accordingly no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is warranted The Appellant prays that the aforesaid addition be deleted. 7. Ground no. 7- Addition under provisions of Section

M/S Avendus Capital Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1739/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashish Mehta & Sahil ShethFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 234CSection 37Section 37(1)

ESOP expenses as revenue expenditure.” Following the decision of ITAT as above the ground no.1 of the assessee is allowed. Ground No. 2: Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D: 5. During the course of assessment on perusal of the balance sheet the assessing officer noticed that assessee has shown current investment ... current investment amounting to Rs.114,05,48,442/-. However, the assessee has made suo-moto disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D at Rs.557,184/- only. Therefore, the assessing officer has computed disallowance as per Sec. P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1738 & 1739/Mum/2023 M/s Avendus Capital Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

M/S Avendus Capital Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1738/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ashish Mehta & Sahil ShethFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Sinha
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 234CSection 37Section 37(1)

ESOP expenses as revenue expenditure.” Following the decision of ITAT as above the ground no.1 of the assessee is allowed. Ground No. 2: Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D: 5. During the course of assessment on perusal of the balance sheet the assessing officer noticed that assessee has shown current investment ... current investment amounting to Rs.114,05,48,442/-. However, the assessee has made suo-moto disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D at Rs.557,184/- only. Therefore, the assessing officer has computed disallowance as per Sec. P a g e | 5 ITA Nos. 1738 & 1739/Mum/2023 M/s Avendus Capital Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT

Nahar Colours and Coatinhgs Private Limited, Udaipur vs. Principal Commissioner Ofincometax, Udaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/JODH/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur09 Aug 2023AY 2018-19
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 801ASection 80I

verification and therefore, invoking the provision on that aspect is bad in law as well as on facts. As regards the merit for disallowance u/s. 14A to be computed that the assessee company has invested the amount out of the own fund and as per the scheme of taxation ... section (3) of section 14A. The sub section (2) of Section 14A basically lays down the manner in which the disallowance u/s 14A has to be calculated, read with Rule 8D of the IT Rules, 1962 Further, sub section (3) of Section 14A only clarifies that even if the assessee

ACIT Circle-54(1), New Delhi vs. National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India, New Delhi

ITA 3555/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Herin Mehta, CA, ShFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 14ASection 2Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 80

facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) has erred in not examining the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made by the Assessing Officer, as the assessee had failed to furnish any cogent explanation in support of its claim ... following manners:- i. Disallowance of Alimenta interest u/s 37(1)/40(a)(i) Rs. 7,53,22,441/- ii. Disallowance U/s 14A Rs. 97,68,296/- iii. Disallowance on account of claims rejected Rs. 2,500/- iv. Disallowance of fixed asset written off Rs. 1,360/- v. Disallowance of speculative

ACIT Circle-54(1), New Delhi vs. National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India, New Delhi

ITA 3554/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Herin Mehta, CA, ShFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 14ASection 2Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 80

facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) has erred in not examining the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made by the Assessing Officer, as the assessee had failed to furnish any cogent explanation in support of its claim ... following manners:- i. Disallowance of Alimenta interest u/s 37(1)/40(a)(i) Rs. 7,53,22,441/- ii. Disallowance U/s 14A Rs. 97,68,296/- iii. Disallowance on account of claims rejected Rs. 2,500/- iv. Disallowance of fixed asset written off Rs. 1,360/- v. Disallowance of speculative

ACIT Circle-54(1), New Delhi vs. National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India, New Delhi

ITA 3553/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Herin Mehta, CA, ShFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 14ASection 2Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 80

facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) has erred in not examining the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made by the Assessing Officer, as the assessee had failed to furnish any cogent explanation in support of its claim ... following manners:- i. Disallowance of Alimenta interest u/s 37(1)/40(a)(i) Rs. 7,53,22,441/- ii. Disallowance U/s 14A Rs. 97,68,296/- iii. Disallowance on account of claims rejected Rs. 2,500/- iv. Disallowance of fixed asset written off Rs. 1,360/- v. Disallowance of speculative

National Agricultural Cooperative Marketing Federation of India, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-32(1), New Delhi

ITA 3000/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Sh. Herin Mehta, CA, ShFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 14ASection 2Section 37(1)Section 40Section 43(5)(d)Section 72Section 80

facts and circumstances of the case, whether the CIT (A) has erred in not examining the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made by the Assessing Officer, as the assessee had failed to furnish any cogent explanation in support of its claim ... following manners:- i. Disallowance of Alimenta interest u/s 37(1)/40(a)(i) Rs. 7,53,22,441/- ii. Disallowance U/s 14A Rs. 97,68,296/- iii. Disallowance on account of claims rejected Rs. 2,500/- iv. Disallowance of fixed asset written off Rs. 1,360/- v. Disallowance of speculative

Kotak Mahindra Investments Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, OSD, Range 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1712/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy Sआअसं. 1712/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2011-12) Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. 27 Bkc, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051. Pan: Aaach1075K ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit (Osd)-3(2), Room No. 555, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Sh. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/08/2023

For Appellant: Sh. Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 234BSection 234C

ACIT 82 taxmann.com 254 (Mum. Trib.)]. Thus, in the light of undisputed facts, we are of considered view that no further disallowance u/s 14A is warranted. The ld. Counsel made a statement that the assessee is committed to the suo-moto disallowance already made. Consequently, the AO is directed

ACIT-5(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Essar Shipping Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statisti...

ITA 87/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit Circle 5(1)(1), M/S Essar Shipping Ltd., R. No. 568, Aayakar Bhavan, Essar House, 11, K K Marg, Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400034. Pan No. Aacce 3707 D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rishav PatawariFor Respondent: Mr. Mudit Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 115VSection 36(1)

investment in subsidiaries which is an issue which utilized for investment in subsidiaries which is an issue which could be examined while disallowance u/s 14A of the Act . The Ld. could be examined while disallowance u/s 14A of the Act . The Ld. could be examined while disallowance u/s 14A

Elara Capital (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1569/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Elara Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-Circle 6(2)(2), Tower 3, 21St Floor, One Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Vs. International Center, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Karve Road, Mumbai- Road (West), Mumbai-400013. 400020. Pan No. Aabce 6487 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Milind DattaniFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chogule (Addl. CIT)
Section 14A

Services Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 2527/Mum/2021 for AY 2017 for AY 2017-18 has discussed the i 18 has discussed the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in the case of no exempted income disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in the case of no exempted income disallowance ... derived from such investments, the any exempt income being derived from such investments, the any exempt income being derived from such investments, the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was unwarranted s 14A of the Act was unwarranted. The AO disallowance u Era Capital (India

Reliance Entertainment Network Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Principle Commissioner of Income Tax-8, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1434/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhreliance Entertainment Vs. Principal Commissioner Networks Pvt. Ltd. Of Income Tax-8, Maneke Mahal, 6Th Floor, Room No. 611, 6 Th Floor, 90, Veer Nariman Road Aayakar Bhavan Churchgate M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400020 Mumbai - 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacr2367J Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : Jitendra Sanghvi & Amit Khatiwala Respondent By : Neena Jeph Date Of Hearing 25.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order U/S 263 Of The Act Passed By The Ld. Pr. Cit, Mumbai-8, Dated 28.03.2023 For A.Y. 2018-19. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. Under The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 08. Mumbai (The Pcit) Erred In Invoking The Provisions Of Section 263 Of The Act & Directing Setting Aside Of The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle -8(1)(1), Mumbai (The Assessing Officer) Dated 3.3.2021 On The Alleged Ground That The Said Assessment Order Was Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Jitendra Sanghvi &For Respondent: Neena Jeph
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

thereby has taken a view following the binding precedent laid down by the Supreme Court and High Court on the issue of disallowance u/s 14A in cases where no exempt income is earned during the year and therefore the order of the assessment is neither erroneous nor prejudicial ... earning exempt income. During the course of assessment proceedings the assessee explained that it had not earned any exempt income, therefore, no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act was made. However, the ld. Pr.CIT observed that vide CBDT circular No. 5/2014 dated 11.02.2014 it is clarified that expenditure relating

DCIT-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jsw Investments Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1088/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Lieder Panicker
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

assessee. 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the sum disallowed u/s 14A cannot be added to the net profit while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act while not placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT ... 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) u/s 10(34) of the Act. The assessee has made disallowance u/s 14A to the amount of Rs.82,34,23,491/- being expenses incurred in relation to exempt income. However, the AO noticed that assessee has incurred interest expenses

DCIT-5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jsw Investments Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee and appeal of the revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1087/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1085 & 1086/Mum/2023 (A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15) Jsw Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit-5(2)(1) Jsw Centre, Bandra 21, 3Rd Floor, Mittal Kurla Complex, Court, 22, Bandra (East), Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajcs2498G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Lieder Panicker
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

assessee. 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding that the sum disallowed u/s 14A cannot be added to the net profit while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act while not placing reliance on decision of Hon'ble ITAT ... 1088/Mum/2023 JSW Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-5(2)(1) u/s 10(34) of the Act. The assessee has made disallowance u/s 14A to the amount of Rs.82,34,23,491/- being expenses incurred in relation to exempt income. However, the AO noticed that assessee has incurred interest expenses