Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 593 (1.26 seconds)
Documents citing Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 25 February, 2015

A.C.I.T (Ods) - 1(3)(1), Mumbai vs Reliance Value Services Pvt. Ltd. ... on 7 August, 2019

7. We notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in question in favour of the assessee by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT (supra) in which the Hon'ble Court has held that section 14A and Rule 8D cannot be interpreted to mean that entire tax exempt income can be disallowed. Since, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are based on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the revenue. We therefore, uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the sole ground of appeal of the revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 7 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Acit,, New Delhi vs M/S Religare Finvest Ltd.,, New Delhi on 24 August, 2020

10.19 Further, In view of the admission by the assessee itself of the disallowance in terms of section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of Rules and thereafter request for restricting the disallowance following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investment Private Limited (supra), we do not find any justification in challenging the issue again before the Tribunal, disputing its own factual submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has admitted before the Ld CIT(A) the fact of investment in Birla Cash Plus on March 30, 33 ITA No.1947/Del./2018 ; 2364/Del.2018;
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Pharmed Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit Cir 2(2)(2), Mumbai on 16 January, 2019

4. We have considered the submission of the parties and have gone through the orders of authorities below. There is no dispute that during the relevant Financial Year, the assessee has earned dividend income of Rs. 28,005/-. Therefore, following the various decisions of decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Joint Investments vs. CIT (372 ITR 694), Punjab & Haryana High Court in PCIT vs. State Bank of Patiala (393 ITR 476), we direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A to the extent of dividend income. In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dcit, New Delhi vs M/S. Orient Craft Ltd., New Delhi on 20 March, 2026

13. The second issue for AY 2009-10; AY 2010-11; AY 2011-12 and AY 2012- 13 relates to the disallowance under section 14A. We find that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT in its own case for AY 2008-09 in ITA 1718/Del/2012. Further the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT (supra), has held that disallowance under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee during the financial year. The court ruled that tax-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Orient Craft Ltd.,New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 20 March, 2026

13. The second issue for AY 2009-10; AY 2010-11; AY 2011-12 and AY 2012- 13 relates to the disallowance under section 14A. We find that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT in its own case for AY 2008-09 in ITA 1718/Del/2012. Further the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT (supra), has held that disallowance under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee during the financial year. The court ruled that tax-
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Madhusha Holdings P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Ito 3(2)(2), Mumbai on 25 January, 2018

dated 21/04/2017. The ratio laid down in Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.) also supports the case of the assessee. As agreed by the Ld. counsel for the assessee that the disallowance cannot be more than the dividend income of Rs.3,93,161/-, we direct the Ld. Assessing Officer that at best the disallowance may be restricted to the dividend income earned by the assessee. The appeal of the assessee is accordingly disposed of in terms indicated hereinabove.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 22 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ajay Alloys (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, Circle- 2(1), New Delhi on 9 April, 2024

Therefore, respectfully following the jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) we restrict the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) to Rs.930/- which is the exempt income earned by the 4 ITA No.5174/Del/2018 assessee during the year under consideration. This ground is partly allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next