- Wednesday, January 11, 2012, 16:22
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 597 views
Remi Sales And Engineering Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (ITAT Mumbai) - Even prior to Assessment Year 2008-09, when Rule 8D was not applicable, the Assessing Officer has to enforce the provisions of sub section (1) of section 14A. For that purpose, the Assessing Officer is duty bound to determine the expenditure which has been incurred [...]
Full Article
- Wednesday, January 4, 2012, 21:31
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 808 views
CIT Vs. Wimco Seedlings Ltd. (Delhi HC) - It was held that unless and until there was actual expenditure for earning the exempted income, there could not be any disallowance under section 14A. While we agree that the expression ‘expenditure incurred’ refers to actual expenditure and not to some imagined expenditure, we would like to make it clear that the ‘actual’ expenditure that is in contemplation under section 14A(1) of the said Act is the ‘actual’ expend..
Full Article
- Sunday, January 1, 2012, 16:10
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 573 views
CIT Vs. Galileo India Pvt Ltd (Delhi HC) - Rule 8D has been held to be prospective in nature and applicable from assessment year 2008-09 by this Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT, New Delhi in ITA No.687/2009 dated 18.11.2011. However, in the said decision it has been observed that direct and indirect expenses have to be disallowed under Section 14A, when an assessee earns exempt income. In the present case no disallowance was made under Section 14A. In these circu..
Full Article
- Thursday, December 29, 2011, 7:40
- Income Tax Case Laws
- 727 views
ACIT Vs. M/s Reliance Land Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)- Assessee proved that interest paid to Reliance Capital Ltd. (7% interest on Rs. 538 crores) amounting to Rs. 2,78,58,082/- has been received from Swan Consultants (P) Ltd. on account of loan advanced to them. Further, the loan was taken on 28.4.2006 and given also on 28.4.2006. Similarly, interest paid to Reliance Capital Ltd. amounting to Rs. 5,60,54,795/- on account of loan of Rs. 300 crores @ 11% interest taken on ..
Full Article
- Tuesday, December 27, 2011, 5:40
- Income Tax
- 361 views
Since the assessment year involved in this appeal is 2005-06 Rule 8D of the IT Rules is not applicable in the present case keeping in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Pvt. Ltd. In this case the ld. CIT-Admn has issued jurisdiction u/s 263 of the IT Act based on the order of the ITAT, Special Bench, which has been subsequently over ruled by Hon’ble Bombay High Court (supra). Therefore we are of the view that i..
Full Article
- Thursday, December 1, 2011, 8:56
- Income Tax
- 1,058 views
Now a days, every assessee who is doing investment in shares are getting hitted hard by the impact of section 14A. The AO are adding back a huge sum on account of this, whereas the assessee had not earned so much from it. The article will provide you brief analysis of this section which will help to substantiate your views at the time of the the assessment or before the appellate authority.
Full Article
- Sunday, November 20, 2011, 12:58
- Income Tax
- 427 views
Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) - Even for the pre-Rule8D period, whenever the issue of section 14A arises before an Assessing Officer, he has, first of all, to ascertain the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the said Act. Even where the assessee claims that no expenditure has been incuured in relation to income which does not form part ..
Full Article
- Sunday, October 16, 2011, 12:43
- Income Tax
- 249 views
Weikfield Products Co.(I)Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT (ITAT Pune) Relevant Extract from the Case law 4. At the outset of hearing, the Ld. A.R. pointed out that the issue raised in the grounds of the appeal is fully covered by the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of assessee itself for the A.Y. 2000-01 [...]
Full Article