THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S QUEST GLOBAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,

In the result, we don to find any

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee was partly allowed. The assessee as well as the revenue filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SYNDICATE BANK

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) of the Act. The Assessing Officer by an order dated 31.12.2002 inter alia held that since exempted dividend does not form part of income, the assessee is not entitled to disallowance of proportionate expenses as required under Section 14A

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD

In the result, the order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

2) and 17 (3) of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules prescribe a formula for determination of expenditure incurred in relation to income, which does not form part of the total income under the Act in a situation where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee. The sine

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

In the result, the order of the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

2) and 17 (3) of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules prescribe a formula for determination of expenditure incurred in relation to income, which does not form part of the total income under the Act in a situation where the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee. The sine

COFFEEDAY GLOBAL LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the orders dated 21

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

disallowance of interest under Section 14A was warranted as regards the very same investments and the facts remained the same in the Assessment Year in question? (v) Whether the tribunal has acted in contravention of the provision of Section 7 254(2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S AMALGAMATED BEAN COFFEE TRADING CO LTD

In the result, the orders dated 21

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

disallowance of interest under Section 14A was warranted as regards the very same investments and the facts remained the same in the Assessment Year in question? (v) Whether the tribunal has acted in contravention of the provision of Section 7 254(2

COFFEEDAY GLOBAL LTD. vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the orders dated 21

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,ASHOK S.KINAGI

disallowance of interest under Section 14A was warranted as regards the very same investments and the facts remained the same in the Assessment Year in question? (v) Whether the tribunal has acted in contravention of the provision of Section 7 254(2

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) vs. M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT LTD

In the result, we don to find any

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

14A: Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income.—For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under this Act.". (2) The Assessing Officer shall determine the amount

ESSILOR INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY

In the result, the order passed by the Tribunal dated 07

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

2 (SC) holding that Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 is prospective and applicable from AY 2008-09, a disallowance under Section 14A

M/S KHODAY INDIA LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D on the facts and circumstances of the case? (iv) Whether the tribunal failed to appreciate that the amount adjusted as capital contribution in the firm of M/s Lakshmi Estate due to business expediency cannot be treated as investment in accordance with Section 14A of the Income- tax Act read

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX LTU vs. M/S. CANARA BANK

The appeal stands disposed of as

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

disallowance is called for under Section 14A of the Act by following earlier order which has not reached finality even when all the ingredients of Section 14A are satisfied in the case of Assessee? 2

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

14A of the Act. 16. As noted above, the AO had denied the exemption under Section 10-AA of the Act on the ground that the same was occasioned by TP adjustment. The said disallowance was founded on the proviso to Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. STATE BANK OF MYSORE

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowed under section 14A of the Act? 5 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL ALUMINIUM LIMITED

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

disallowance under Section 14A of the Act? 4 2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that

ESSILOR INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

disallowance made to the extent as claimed by the assessee has to be upheld. 7. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. Section 14A of the Act deals with expenditure in relation to income not includable in total income. Section 14A(2

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. M/S. NADATHUR ESTATES PVT. LTD.,

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. In the present case the following Substantial Question of Law has to be adjudicated: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in restoring the issue of disallowance under section 14A

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SUBRAMANYA CONSTRUCTIONS

In the result, we do not find any merit in these

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

disallowances made under Section 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) of the Act, without appreciating the Board

PR,COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SUBRAMANYA CONSTRUCTIONS

In the result, we do not find any merit in these

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

disallowances made under Section 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) of the Act, without appreciating the Board

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. GMR ENERGY LTD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(i) of the Rules was restricted to Rs.1,10,967/- and disallowance