APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the further disallowance made by AO amounting to Rs. 1,40,266/- u/s 14A

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the further disallowance made by AO amounting to Rs. 1,40,266/- u/s 14A

APEEJAY PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

section 2(22)(e) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the further disallowance made by AO amounting to Rs. 1,40,266/- u/s 14A

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

disallowance of expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total income is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether the assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the previous year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that: \"The provisions of sub-section (2

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

disallowance\nof expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total\nincome is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether\nthe assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the\nprevious year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that:\n\"The provisions of sub-section (2

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

disallowance\nof expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total\nincome is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether\nthe assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the\nprevious year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that:\n\"The provisions of sub-section (2

DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA vs. M/S COAL INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

disallowance\nof expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total\nincome is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether\nthe assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the\nprevious year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that:\n\"The provisions of sub-section (2

M/S. COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

disallowance\nof expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total\nincome is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether\nthe assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the\nprevious year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that:\n\"The provisions of sub-section (2

COAL INDIA LIMITED ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

disallowance\nof expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total\nincome is that expenditure incurred is not allowable for the purpose whether\nthe assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred during the\nprevious year. Section 14A(3) of the Income Tax Act states that:\n\"The provisions of sub-section (2

MEGA ENGINEERS & BUILDERS,PORT BLAIR vs. DCIT, CIR. 3(2) , PORT BLAIR

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

2% u/s 194C whereas as a matter of fact, TDS should have been deducted at the rate of 10% u/s 194A of the Act. Finally, the AO disallowed 30% of the above interest payment being disallowance u/s 40a(ia) of the Act. In our opinion the provisions of Section 40a(ia) cannot be invoked where there is a short deduction

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule\n8D(2)(ii)was deleted while disallowance of indirect expenses of\nRs.1,82,346/- by application

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- V (I), KOLKATA vs. BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED, BIRLA BUILDING

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue is dismissed, as also the cross objection filed by the assessee for both the years

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in invoking sub-section (2) of section 14A and rule

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule\n8D(2)(ii)was deleted while disallowance of indirect expenses of\nRs.1,82,346/- by application

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule\n8D(2)(ii)was deleted while disallowance of indirect expenses of\nRs.1,82,346/- by application

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

disallowance of Rs. 3,15,04,684/- under section 14A of the Act made by the Ld. AO based on surmises and conjectures without having recorded any reasoned dissatisfaction under section 14A(2

M/S TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

disallowance of Rs. 3,15,04,684/- under section 14A of the Act made by the Ld. AO based on surmises and conjectures without having recorded any reasoned dissatisfaction under section 14A(2

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

disallowance under section 14A read with Rule\n8D(2)(ii)was deleted while disallowance of indirect expenses of\nRs.1,82,346/- by application

DIDU INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-6(1), KOLKATA

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

disallowance under section 14A, the AO having duly recorded his satisfaction. 6.2 The application of Rule 8D does not preclude an assessee from contending that he has not incurred any expenditure towards interest to earn the exempt income. Rule 8D(2

M/S COAL INDIA LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-5(1), , KOLKATA

disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule\n8D(2)(iii) was restored to the file of AO and no judgment