Income Tax : The issue was whether exempt dividend income could be taxed by overriding Rule 8D. The ITAT held that additions beyond the Section...
Income Tax : Tribunal confirms that detailed AO dissatisfaction justifies invoking Rule 8D, ensuring proper disallowance of expenses related to...
Income Tax : Clarification in respect of disallowance under section 14A in absence of any exempt income during an assessment year Section 14A o...
Income Tax : The issue before the Hon’ble Supreme Court (SC) was whether section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) enables the Depart...
Income Tax : The ever debatable ‘Disallowance under section 14A’ (read with Rule 8D (2) now has again found a different horizon whe...
Income Tax : The mechanical disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D is also being added to the book profit by the AO irrespective of the fact whethe...
Income Tax : As earlier intimated to you, Writ Petition bearing No. 50 of 2010 (Indian Exporters Grievances Forum & Other vs. CIT) challenging ...
Income Tax : The Supreme Court upheld the deletion of Section 14A disallowance after finding that the Assessing Officer did not record dissatis...
Income Tax : The tribunal held that disallowance under Section 14A cannot be made when the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi ruled that disallowance under Section 14A cannot be made without AO recording satisfaction under Section 14A(2), fully ...
Income Tax : The ITAT found that Rule 8D cannot be applied blindly without examining the nature of investments and income earned. The matter wa...
Income Tax : he ITAT ruled that an automatic ₹56 lakh 14A disallowance was invalid as the AO failed to record specific satisfaction regarding...
Income Tax : Circular No. 5/2014-Income Tax Central Board of Direct Taxes, in exercise of its powers under section 119 of the Act hereby clari...
Income Tax : INCOME TAX NOTIFICATION NO-45/2008, DT: March 24, 2008 Method for determining amount of expenditure in relation to income not incl...
CIT vs. Leena Ramachandran (Kerala High Court):-I-T- Sec 14A – assessee can claim deduction of interest paid on borrowed funds utilised for acquisition of shares only if shares are held as stock-in-trade and not investment: HC
Wallfort Shares & Stock Brokers, a Five Member Special Bench of the Tribunal (96 ITD 1 (Mum) (SB)) and the Bombay High Court (310 ITR 421 (Bom)) held that the ‘loss’ incurred by an assessee in ‘dividend-stripping’ transactions cannot be disallowed on the ground that it was ‘tax-planning‘. The department’s SLP against the said judgement has been dismissed by the Supreme Court today, 6th July 2010.
As earlier intimated to you, Writ Petition bearing No. 50 of 2010 (Indian Exporters Grievances Forum & Other vs. CIT) challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 8D has been admitted on 12.1.2010 by Hon’ble Shri Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Hon’ble Shri Justice J.P. Devadhar of the Bombay High Court.
Whether for the purpose of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act:-(a) Rule 8D is to be considered as retrospective; Whether before application of Rule 8D the Assessing Officer should give a holding that he is not satisfied for the basis or quantum of expenses disallowed by the Assessee; b) Whether disallowance is to be made if Investment is held as stock-in-trade?
CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. (Punjab & Haryana High Court) Disallowance under Section 14A requires finding of incurring of expenditure where it is found that for earning exempted income no expenditure has been incurred, disallowance under Section 14A cannot stand.
Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the hon’ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the order of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Abhishek Industries Ltd. reported in [2006] 286 ITR 1 (P&H); 156 Taxman 257 (P&H) are not applicable in this case and the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Income-tax Act is not as per law.
INCOME TAX NOTIFICATION NO-45/2008, DT: March 24, 2008 Method for determining amount of expenditure in relation to income not includible in total income. 8D(1) Where the Assessing Officer, having regard to the accounts of the assessee of a previous year, is not satisfied with-(a) the correctness of the claim of expenditure made by the assessee; or (b) the claim made by the assessee that no expenditure has been incurred, in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act for such previous year, he shall determine the amount of expenditure in relation to such income in accordance with the provisions of sub-rule (2).
