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

section 133(6) on sample basis amounting to circa 40% of the total expenditure claimed by the assessee and based on the response recomputed the disallowance towards commission paid to those parties. We further notice that for the rest of the parties considering the difficulty in examining the data, the AO has applied 10% as adhoc disallowance

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

section 133(6) on sample basis amounting to circa 40% of the total expenditure claimed by the assessee and based on the response recomputed the disallowance towards commission paid to those parties. We further notice that for the rest of the parties considering the difficulty in examining the data, the AO has applied 10% as adhoc disallowance

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 ()

disallowed in full under sub disallowed in full under sub-rule (i); and Asia Investments Pvt. Ltd ITA No. 4529, 6353/MUM/2017, 6209/MUM/2019 (ii) indirect interest expenditure indirect interest expenditure, being interest that cannot be , being interest that cannot be specifically identified or segregated as relating either to taxable specifically identified or segregated as relating either to taxable specifically identified

APL LOGISTICS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

DCIT 10(1), MUMBAI vs. APL LOGISTICS (INDIA ) P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

APL LOGISTICS (INDIA) P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 10(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r 8D. & 2917 M 15- APL Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd. The ld. Counsel submitted that the issue raised in the present appeal are identical to the issues adjudicated by the Tribunal in assessee’s appeal for AY 2006-07 & 2007-08. The ld. Counsel pointed that the submissions made while addressing the issue

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\nunder section 14A of the Act.\n(iii) Without prejudice to ground no.1 the appellant prays that investments\ncapable of yielding taxable income ought to be excluded while computing the\ndisallowance under section 14A of the Act.\niv) Without prejudice to ground no.1 the appellant prays that amount of\ndisallowance under section 14A of the Act ought

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. ()

section 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii) had included the same. Thus the Assessing Officer proceeded to compute the disallowance by applying rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) to the tune of Rs.12,88

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. ()

section 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii) had included the same. Thus the Assessing Officer proceeded to compute the disallowance by applying rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) to the tune of Rs.12,88

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)

disallowance u/s 14A should have been made while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. In support of the above propositions, the Ld. counsel relied on the decision in H.T. Media Ltd. (ITA No. 548/2015) (Del HC), Smartchem Technologies (ITA No. 7014/M/2013) dated 23 June 2017, Ashish Jhunjhunwala (88 CCH 470) (Cal HC) dated 8 January 2014, Cheminvest

INDIABULLAS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-6(4), MUMBAI

Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) (b) addition of INR 226,48,84,020/- on account of disallowance of ESOP Expenses and (c) addition of INR 63,88

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] &

disallowance of expenditure incurred in earning an income, it is a condition precedent that such income should not be includible in total income of assessee. ` This Court accordingly concluded that for attracting provisions of Section 14A, the proof of fact regarding such expenditure being incurred for earning exempt income is necessary. The relevant portion of Justice Gogoi's judgment reads

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\nunder section 14A of the Act.\n(iii) Without prejudice to ground no.1 the appellant prays that investments\ncapable of yielding taxable income ought to be excluded while computing the\ndisallowance under section 14A of the Act.\niv) Without prejudice to ground no.1 the appellant prays that amount of\ndisallowance under section 14A of the Act ought

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

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