BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot be applied in assessee's case. The relevant provisions of section 14A of the Act and Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules read as under – 14A - Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned issue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in this regard are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot be applied in assessee's case. The relevant provisions of section 14A of the Act and Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules read as under – 14A - Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income (1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction shall

ASIA INVESTMENTS PVT.. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT ,CIRCLE 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

154 (SC), it was submitted that disallowance under section 14A of the , it was submitted that disallowance under section 14A of the , it was submitted

BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT 2(1), MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned\nissue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in\nthis regard are allowed for statistical purposes

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D\ncannot be applied in assessee's case. The relevant provisions of section 14A of the\nAct and Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules read as under\n14A - Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income\n(1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction

DCIT-1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI

disallowance of leave encashment, and foreign exchange variation losses were addressed, with some issues being remitted back to the Assessing Officer.", "result": "Allowed/Dismissed/Partly Allowed/Remanded", "sections": ["Section 14A", "Rule 8D", "Section 43B(f)", "Section 37(1)", "Section 115JB", "Section 154

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED , MUMBAI

Accordingly should be allowed as a deduction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

154 (SC) to hold that all investments including purchase of shares for gaining control over the investing company to be considered for making disallowance under section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CC-7(3), MUMBAI vs. M/S MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LODHA DEVELOPERS PVT LTD) (SUCCESSOER OF M/S BELLISSIMO CROWN BUILDMART PVT LTD ), MUMBAI

Accordingly should be allowed as a deduction

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

154 (SC) to hold that all investments including purchase of shares for gaining control over the investing company to be considered for making disallowance under section

SICOM LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 3(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesee is partly allow for statistical purpose and the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicialmember Sicom Ltd, Vs. Dy Commissioner Of Solitaire Corporate Income Tax Circle Park, Bldg No.04, 3(3)(1), Chakala, Andheri(E), 6Th Floor, Room No. Mumbai-400093. 609,Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं.Pan/Gir No. Aaacs5524J (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Dy Commissioner Of Vs. Sicom Ltd, Income Tax Circle Solitaire Corporate Park, 3(3)(1), Bldg No.04, Chakala, 6Th Floor, Room No. Andheri(E), 609,Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400093. Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं.Pan/Gir No. Aaacs5524J (अपीलाथ"/Applicant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

154 (SC), it is held that dominant purpose for which investment into shares is made by assessee may not be relevant as section 14A applies irrespective of whether shares are held to gain control or as stock-in-trade. 4.3 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. In the instant case, as recorded

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001." 12. The sub-section (2) and (3) were introduced to the main section by the Finance Act, 2006 with effect from 1-4-2007. 13. The question therefore to be answered is whether section 14A, enables the Department to make disallowance

DCIT 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BAJAJ ELECTRICALS LTD, MUMBAI

Accordingly we remit the impugned\nissue back to the AO with similar directions. The grounds raised by the assessee in\nthis regard are allowed for statistical purposes

disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D\ncannot be applied in assessee's case. The relevant provisions of section 14A of the\nAct and Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules read as under\n14A - Expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income\n(1) For the purposes of computing the total income under this Chapter, no deduction

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LTD.(SUCCESSOR TO BELLISSIMO CROWN BUILDMART PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

disallowance under section 14 A the act. 034. Ground number 3 is with respect to the foreign exchange gain incurred on purchase of material ITA Nos. 2266 & 2239/Mum/2022 Macrotech Developers Ltd; A.Ys. 17-18 & 18-19 claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure and the learned assessing officer is of the view that it should be included in the cost

MACROTECH DEVELOPRS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 7(3), MUMBAI

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

disallowance under section 14 A the act. 034. Ground number 3 is with respect to the foreign exchange gain incurred on purchase of material ITA Nos. 2266 & 2239/Mum/2022 Macrotech Developers Ltd; A.Ys. 17-18 & 18-19 claimed by the assessee as revenue expenditure and the learned assessing officer is of the view that it should be included in the cost

HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORP LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1)(2), MUMBAI

Bench: us. 2.

154 read with Section 250 of the Act rectifying order, dated 19/03/2019, passed by the CIT(A). 2.2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 3195/Mum/2019: “1. Disallowance

RELIANCE RETAIL LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 8(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed,\nwhereas the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

154 ITR 148) and Apex Laboratories\nPvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (135 taxmann.com 286), the Assessing Officer\nconcluded that the assessee was attempting to obtain, indirectly,\na\ndeduction which the legislature intended to deny. He\naccordingly disallowed the deduction of Rs. 10,53,00,000/-.\nclaimed under section

DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 to AY 2018-19 is allowed and the Revenue's appeal for AY 2016-17 to 2018-19 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A to the tune of Rs. 20,18,079/- based on the Accountant's report. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) [91 taxmann.com 154

DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 to AY 2018-19 is allowed and the Revenue's appeal for AY 2016-17 to 2018-19 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A to the tune of Rs. 20,18,079/- based on the Accountant's report. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) [91 taxmann.com 154

HDFC BANK LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 to AY 2018-19 is allowed and the Revenue's appeal for AY 2016-17 to 2018-19 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A to the tune of Rs. 20,18,079/- based on the Accountant's report. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) [91 taxmann.com 154

DCIT 2(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 to AY 2018-19 is allowed and the Revenue's appeal for AY 2016-17 to 2018-19 is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

disallowance under section 14A to the tune of Rs. 20,18,079/- based on the Accountant's report. The assessee also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) [91 taxmann.com 154