← 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 CC 8(3)(Erstwhile DCIT, CC-46, Mumbai vs. Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5327/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2011-12
Section 14A

Steels Ltd. 5. “On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act rw.Rule 8D of Rs. 2,04,19,763/- as against a disallowance of Rs 42,84,300/- made by the assessee ... Assessing Officer to consider the refund of Sales Tax of Rs. 58,28,74,773/- as Capital Receipt, directing the deletion of disallowance u/s 14A and to consider the income on sale of Certified Emission Reductions ('CER') receipts as Capital Receipt for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB

DCIT CC 8(3)(Erstwhile DCIT, CC-46, Mumbai vs. Jsw Steels Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5326/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2010-11
Section 14A

Steels Ltd. 5. “On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act rw.Rule 8D of Rs. 2,04,19,763/- as against a disallowance of Rs 42,84,300/- made by the assessee ... Assessing Officer to consider the refund of Sales Tax of Rs. 58,28,74,773/- as Capital Receipt, directing the deletion of disallowance u/s 14A and to consider the income on sale of Certified Emission Reductions ('CER') receipts as Capital Receipt for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB

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

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5325/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2009-10
Section 14A

Steels Ltd. 5. “On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act rw.Rule 8D of Rs. 2,04,19,763/- as against a disallowance of Rs 42,84,300/- made by the assessee ... Assessing Officer to consider the refund of Sales Tax of Rs. 58,28,74,773/- as Capital Receipt, directing the deletion of disallowance u/s 14A and to consider the income on sale of Certified Emission Reductions ('CER') receipts as Capital Receipt for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB

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

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4632/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2008-09
Section 14A

Steels Ltd. 5. “On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act rw.Rule 8D of Rs. 2,04,19,763/- as against a disallowance of Rs 42,84,300/- made by the assessee ... Assessing Officer to consider the refund of Sales Tax of Rs. 58,28,74,773/- as Capital Receipt, directing the deletion of disallowance u/s 14A and to consider the income on sale of Certified Emission Reductions ('CER') receipts as Capital Receipt for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB

Jsw Steel Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-46, Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4287/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2008-09
Section 14A

Steels Ltd. 5. “On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act rw.Rule 8D of Rs. 2,04,19,763/- as against a disallowance of Rs 42,84,300/- made by the assessee ... Assessing Officer to consider the refund of Sales Tax of Rs. 58,28,74,773/- as Capital Receipt, directing the deletion of disallowance u/s 14A and to consider the income on sale of Certified Emission Reductions ('CER') receipts as Capital Receipt for the purpose of computing book profit u/s 115JB

DCIT CC 6(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Beil Infrastructure Ltd. ( Earlier Known As Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd, Anlkleshwar

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 400/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Om Prakash Kantvk-Vk-La- 586@Eaqcbz@2017 ¼Fu-Oa- 2012&13½ Beil Infrastructure Limited (Earlier Known As Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Limited) Plot No.9701-16, Gidc Estate, Ankleshwar Gujarat-393 002 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aaacb8075F Cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-6(3) Room No. 1903, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 021 Vk-Vk-La- 400@Eaqcbz@2017 ¼Fu-Oa- 2012&13½ Vk-Vk-La- 1950@Eaqcbz@2022 ¼Fu-Oa- 2015&16½ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cc-6(3) Room No. 1903, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Mumbai-400 021 Cuke Vs. Beil Infrastructure Limited (Earlier Known As Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Limited) Plot No.117/18, Gidc Estate, Ankleshwar Gujarat-393 002 ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Pan No. Aaacb8075F

For Appellant: Shri Kirit Kamdar &For Respondent: Shri Salil Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 234CSection 80Section 801A

supra) in support of his contentions. 4.2 In respect of ground no. 4 of appeal, the ld. AR submitted that the AO made disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(3) of the Act Rs.1,89,103/- under normal provision as well as u/s 115JB of the Act. During ... under appeal, the assessee has not earned any dividend income/income P a g e | 6 ITA No.400/MUM/2017 (A.Y.2012-13) exempt from tax. Hence, no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is warranted. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions: i. PCIT vs. Red Chillies

ACIT Special Range-1, New Delhi vs. Agricultural Insurance Company of India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 891/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Akash Singhal, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 14A

Delhi dated 22.11.2018. 2. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the identical issue of disallowance u/s 14A and interest on corpus fund has been a subject matter of adjudication in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2012-13 by the Tribunal vide order dated

Living Media India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-15(2), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the consequences shall follow

ITA 7594/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. G. S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmam/S. Living Media India Ltd. Vs. Acit, K-9, Connaught Circus, Circle-15(2), New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan : Aaacl0087H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

income, as appearing in the balance sheet of the assessee, on the first day and the last day of the previous year. Total disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 6,37,90,540/- 2.1 Ld. AO had also made a disallowance of Rs. 78,20,000/- u/s ... Ground no. 1; 1.1 and 1.2; On behalf of the assessee it was submitted that the assessee had made a suo moto disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and without recording any satisfaction note the ld. AO made disallowance u/s 14A. Ld. Counsel relied judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court

Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2860/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaacit, Vs. M/S. Nitrex Chemicals India Circle 18(2), Ltd. New Delhi 1213, Ansal Towers, 38-Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 Pan : Aaacf7820L M/S. Nitrex Chemicals India Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle 18(2), 1213, Ansal Towers, New Delhi 38-Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 Pan : Aaacf7820L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)

Assessee’s Appeal. The issue is with regard to addition of Rs. 4,98,412/- made by Ld. AO on account of disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D. It appears admitted from the matter on record that during the year under consideration, no exempt income has been earned ... contrary the judgments relied on behalf of the assessee expressly held that as assessee has not claimed any exempt income, no disallowance u/s 14A is required. Ground is allowed in favour of assessee. M/s. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd. 8. Ground no 2 of Assessee’s Appeal. In regard

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2536/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaacit, Vs. M/S. Nitrex Chemicals India Circle 18(2), Ltd. New Delhi 1213, Ansal Towers, 38-Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 Pan : Aaacf7820L M/S. Nitrex Chemicals India Vs. Dcit, Ltd. Circle 18(2), 1213, Ansal Towers, New Delhi 38-Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019 Pan : Aaacf7820L (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)

Assessee’s Appeal. The issue is with regard to addition of Rs. 4,98,412/- made by Ld. AO on account of disallowance u/s 14A read with rule 8D. It appears admitted from the matter on record that during the year under consideration, no exempt income has been earned ... contrary the judgments relied on behalf of the assessee expressly held that as assessee has not claimed any exempt income, no disallowance u/s 14A is required. Ground is allowed in favour of assessee. M/s. Nitrex Chemicals India Ltd. 8. Ground no 2 of Assessee’s Appeal. In regard

M/S Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., E-8, Epip Riico Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-2, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 260/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 30Section 44

holding that assessment order passed u/s 143(3) dt. 01.03.2021 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue in as much as disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r8D(2) of the Act has not been considered by AO ignoring that this issue has been raised by the AO in notice u/s ... also without going through the judgment cited by the assessee. In absence of clear evidences and basis of allocation, the expenses disallowable u/s 14A of the Act should have been computed under Rule 8D. Hence, the order passed by the AO is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial

Essel Mining & Industries Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Central Circle 1(4), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1018/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 32ASection 801ASection 80I

entire borrowed fund has been utilized by the appellant exclusively for business purposes, no part of the interest paid by it, could be disallowed u/s 14A by applying the Rule 8D(2)(ii) and thus he erred in not deleting the entire disallowance u/s 14A/Rule 8D(2)(ii). 2. That ... facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act should not exceed the exempted dividend income. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case

M/S Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-(Ltu) 2, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 923/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 14ASection 154Section 250Section 36Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 80GSection 80L

Chapter VI-A deductions 13,58,49,246/- Add : Deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) 555,29,90,155/- Less: Relief allowed by ITAT Disallowance u/s 14A 47,38,66,147 Deduction u/s 36(1)(viii) 250,35,00,000/- Rs.416,98,00,000/- less Rs.166,63,00,000/- (Relief allowed

DCIT, CC-6(4), Mumbai vs. Ajay Shankarlal Mittal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1034/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmandcit, Cc – 6(4) Ajayshankarlalmittal, Room No. 1925, 19Th 62-A, Mittal Bhavan, बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg Dr.Gopalrao Vs. Nariman Point, Deshmukh Road, Mumbai – 400021. Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6550R (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr.Ujjawal Kumar .DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

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 Ajay Shankarlal Mittal, Mumbai ii. "On the facts ... statements found that the assessee is holding huge investments having the potential of earning exempt income. Since the assessee has not made the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D of IT Rules, hence the AO has issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act for invoking the 3 Ajay Shankarlal Mittal

DCIT, CC-6(4), Mumbai vs. Archana Ajay Mittal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1032/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanthe Dcit, Cc-6(4) Archana Ajay Mittal Room No. 1925, 19Th 302, Level-3, Ceejay बनाम/ Floor Air India Bldg, House, Anne Besant Vs. Nariman Point, Road, Worli, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6545C (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kavita Kaushik.DRFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 57

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 Archana Ajay Mittal, Mumbai ii. "On the facts ... holding huge investments having the potential of earning exempt income. Since the assessee has 3 Archana Ajay Mittal, Mumbai not made the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D of IT Rules, the AO has issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act for invoking the provisions. The assessee vide letter dated

Mrs Aruna Paresh Patel, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1015/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmandcit, Cc – 6(4) Ajayshankarlalmittal, Room No. 1925, 19Th 62-A, Mittal Bhavan, बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg Dr.Gopalrao Vs. Nariman Point, Deshmukh Road, Mumbai – 400021. Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6550R (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr.Ujjawal Kumar .DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

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 Ajay Shankarlal Mittal, Mumbai ii. "On the facts ... statements found that the assessee is holding huge investments having the potential of earning exempt income. Since the assessee has not made the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D of IT Rules, hence the AO has issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act for invoking the 3 Ajay Shankarlal Mittal

M/S Greatship (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm.of Income Tax 5(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2422/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Greatship (India) Vs. Assistant Commissioner Ltd., C/O, Kalyaniwalla Of Income Tax -5(1)(1) Mistry Llp, Esplanade Room No. 568, Aayakar House, 29, Hazarimal Bhavan, M.K. Road, Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400001 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcg8542K Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: M.M. Golvala &For Respondent: Asif Karmali
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 928Section 92C

assessee company with its associated enterprise during the F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to assessment year under consideration. The Assessing officer has also proposed disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule 8D to the amount of Rs.38,51,576/-. 3. The assessee has filed objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel against the addition disallowances ... allowed. P a g e | 9 M/s Greatship (India) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 5(1)(1) Ground No. 10 to 13: Disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D: 10. During the year under consideration the assesse has earned dividend income of Rs.1,92,00,113/- from surplus funds parked in mutual fund

DCIT C.C. 8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2302/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

u/s 14A of the Act to the extent of exempt income earned by the Appellant. (vi) The Appellant prays that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D be deleted or appropriately reduced. 03. The ld AO has raised following Grounds of Appeal ... Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was right in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee which is contrary to CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 which clarifies that Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A

DCIT CC 8(4) ., Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2301/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

u/s 14A of the Act to the extent of exempt income earned by the Appellant. (vi) The Appellant prays that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D be deleted or appropriately reduced. 03. The ld AO has raised following Grounds of Appeal ... Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was right in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee which is contrary to CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 which clarifies that Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A

DCIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2300/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

u/s 14A of the Act to the extent of exempt income earned by the Appellant. (vi) The Appellant prays that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with rule 8D be deleted or appropriately reduced. 03. The ld AO has raised following Grounds of Appeal ... Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was right in restricting the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee which is contrary to CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 which clarifies that Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A