Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 v. The Cricket Club Of India
High Court
06 Jun 2019 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 v. The Cricket Club Of India
Date of order
06 Jun 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 v. The Cricket Club Of India, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: 2.The following question is presented for ourconsideration:- "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and inlaw, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the disallowance of Rs.33,34,130? u/S.
Decision: In that view of thematter, this appeal is also dismissed. [ S.J.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
(Private Secretary)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO.O.C.J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 911 OF 2017
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1
Versus
..Appellant
The Cricket Club of India
..Respondent
...................
Mr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Swapna Gokhale & Ms. SumandeviYadav for the AppellantMr. Suresh Kumar a/w Ms. Swapna Gokhale & Ms. SumandeviYadav for the Appellant
Mr. R. Murlidharan i/by Mr. Atul Jasani for the Respondent Mr. R. Murlidharan i/by Mr. Atul Jasani for the Respondent
...................
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE : JUNE 6, 2019.
P.C.:
1.The Revenue is in the appeal against the judgment of
the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (“the Tribunal”for short) dated 21.3.2016.
2.The following question is presented for ourconsideration:-
"Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and inlaw, the Tribunal was correct in deleting the disallowance of Rs.33,34,130? u/S. 14A, holding that the Assessing Officer shouldexamine the matter on this issue on reasonable basis?"
3. The issue pertains to disallowance of expenditureincurred for earning exempt income in terms of Section 14Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short). Theassessing officer had applied Rule 8D in relation to theassessment year 2004-05. CIT(A) held that the said Ruledoes not have retrospective applicability but remanded theissue for the Assessing Officer to make a reasonabledisallowance. The Tribunal confirmed this view. This aspectis squarely covered by the decision of this Court in case ofGodrej & Boyce Mfg Co Ltd Vs. CIT[1] . In that view of thematter, this appeal is also dismissed.
[ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ]
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.