Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.94 seconds)Section 194H in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 201 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Vodafone Mobile Services Limited, ... vs Dcit, Coimbatore on 21 September, 2017
4. Bharti Cellular Ltd. vs. ACIT (2011)
12 taxmann.com 30 (Calcutta)."
Dcit, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad, ... vs Sanghi Industries Limited, R.R.Dist., ... on 20 April, 2018
)(HC) in ITA No.
404 of 2018, Ahmedabad Tribunal's decision in the case of
Sanghi Infrastructure Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2576/Ahd/2012
for Assessment Year 2009-10 vide order dated 30.09.2016 and
Page | 14
ITA Nos.
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs M/S. Vegetables Products Ltd on 29 January, 1973
(supra) has decided the same issue in
favour of the assessee. Though we are
aware that the ld. CIT(A) has referred to
the decisions in favour of the Revenue on
similar issue of Hon'ble Delhi High Court,
but however as held by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of CIT v. Vegetable
Products Ltd. [1973] 88 ITR 192 (SC) if
two views are possible, one in favour of
the assessee should be adopted. Moreover,
as we have already found that the ratios of
decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High
Court as mentioned hereinabove are also
in favour of the assessee. Hence, there is
no question of taking a contrary view
following the other high courts. The
remarks of the ld. CIT(A) on the
jurisdictional High Court decision are
totally uncalled for, neither permissible nor
sustainable.
M/S. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., New ... vs Acit, New Delhi on 16 June, 2017
23. We have heard both the parties, perused the material
available on record and gone through the orders of the
authorities below. We find that this issue is squarely covered in
favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High
Court in the case of Ballarpur Industries Ltd. in ITA No. 51 of
2016, wherein it was held that when there is no exempt income
then no disallowance of expenses u/s 14A of the IT Act, 1961
can be made. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of
Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33supra) has held that if there is no
exempt income then no disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of
the Act can be made. The ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case
of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. [2017] 58 ITR(T) 313
(Delhi - Trib.) (SB) has reiterated similar principles of law.
Therefore, we are of the considered view that once, there is no
exempt income earned for the year, then disallowance
contemplated u/s 14A of the Act cannot be pressed into. In this
case, the Revenue has not disputed the fact that the assessee
has not earned exempt income for the year under consideration.
Since, there is no exempt income for the year, the disallowance
of expenditure contemplated u/s 14A of the Act cannot be made.
The Coinage Act, 2011
Mahindra Holdings And Finance Limited vs Dcit And Ito on 30 May, 2008
3214, 3215,3971 & 3972/Mum/2014
Tata Sky Limited; AYs 09-10 & 10-11
Mumbai Tribunal's decision in the case of Mahindra & Mahindra
Limited vs. DCIT in ITA No.8597/Mum/2010 for Assessment Year
2006-07 vide order dated 06.06.2012 and Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd.
Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 8427/Mum/2010 for Assessment Year 2006-
07 vide order dated 17.09.2014. He argued that there is no
obligation on the assessee to deduct tax on the year-end
provisions and accordingly, the same should not be disallowed
under section 40(a)(ia) of Act for AY 2009-10.
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) Jaipur vs M/S Idea Cellular Limited on 5 October, 2018
"1. CIT vs. Idea Cellular Ltd. (2020) 189
Taxman 118 (Delhi)