9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f M/s Mayank Auto Engineers P Ltd. vs. DCIT [ 2015 (3) TMI 1172 - ITAT DELHI ] as well as the decision of CIT Vs Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2014 (9) TMI 434 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] As assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year disallowance u/s 14A was not warranted. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the present case is also squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT, Delhi 'E' Bench, decided in the case of M/s Mayank Auto Engineers P Ltd. vs. DCIT wherein the Tribunal vide order dated 25.3.2015 has followed the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. (Supra). 3. Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied upon the orders of authorities below. 4. I have heard rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find that A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not pointed out any income earned by assessee which was exempt income. I find that there was no exempt income pointed out by the Revenue Authorities and A.O. had made addition holding that assessee had source of exempt income. Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry decision of a High Court has been shown to us. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Vs. Mis. Lakhani Marketing Incl., ITA No. 970/2008, decided on 02.04.2014, made reference to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Limited, [2010] 323 ITR 518 and CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries Limited, [2009] 319 ITR 204 to hold that Section 14A cannot be' invoked when no exempt income was earned. The second decision is of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.). The third decision is of the Allahabad High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 88 of 2014, Commissioner of Income Tax (Ii) Kanpur, Vs. M/s. Shivam Motors ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of shares in an off market transaction attracts capital gains tax. It is an undisputed position that respondent assessee is an investment company and had invested by purchasing a substantial number of shares and thereby securing right to management. Possibility of sale of shares by private placement etc. cannot be ruled out and is not an improbability. Dividend mayor may not be declared. Dividend is declared by the company and strictly in legal sense, a shareholder has no control and cannot insist on payment of dividend. When declared, it is subjected to dividend distribution tax. 16. What is also noticeable is that the entire or whole expenditure has been disallowed as if there was no expenditure incurred by the respondentassessee for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
