CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.

358 ITR 323High Court2013#1435 most cited

What is CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. authority for?

No disallowance under section 14A for interest expenditure is permissible when the assessee possesses adequate own funds to make investments, provided the Assessing Officer does not establish a direct nexus between borrowed funds and investments yielding tax-exempt income. This principle can also extend to administrative expenses.

80

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. · Section 14A disallowance · interest expenditure · administrative expenditure · own funds · surplus funds · tax-exempt income · borrowed funds nexus · Section 1961 · disallowance of expenses

Also reported as

36 Taxmann.com 230217 Taxmann 229

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 1961Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 14bsection 10(33)section 14(2)goodwill arising on amalgamationsection 40a(7)section 9(1)(ii)wholly and exclusively for businesssection 28(iv)section 43b(b)minimum alternate taxgoing concernsection 43(6)(c)

Judgments citing CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd.

JOINT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX(OSD) CIRCLE 3(1)(1) AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 164/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 164/Ahd/2026 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Joint Commissioner of Vs. Nirma Chemical Works Income-tax (OSD), Private Limited, Circle 3(1)(1), Ahmedabad Nirma House, Near Income Tax Circle, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-38009 [PAN : AAACN 5353 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee represented by : Shri Hemanshu Shah, CA Revenue represented by: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 26.02.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESID…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…627  Alkali & Chemical Corp. of India v. CIT: (1986) 161 ITR 820 (Cal.)  CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)  CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom)  Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd.: 358 ITR 323 (Guj)  Hero Honda Finlease Ltd vs. ACIT: ITA No. 3726 & 6102/Del/2012 (Del) 8. Further he submitted that interest expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 14A where the assessee had surplus funds and there was no finding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments:  CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.: 410…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…627  Alkali & Chemical Corp. of India v. CIT: (1986) 161 ITR 820 (Cal.)  CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)  CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom)  Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd.: 358 ITR 323 (Guj)  Hero Honda Finlease Ltd vs. ACIT: ITA No. 3726 & 6102/Del/2012 (Del) 8. Further he submitted that interest expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 14A where the assessee had surplus funds and there was no finding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments:  CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.: 410…

AGRASEN ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1085/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Him.

For Appellant: Sh. Vijay Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR
Section 111ASection 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…323 ITR 518) 85-87 13 Commissioner of Income-tax, Bangalore v. Karnataka State Industrial & 88-92 Infrastructure Development Corpn. Ltd. [2016] 237 Taxman 240 (Karnataka) 14 Commissioner of Income-tax-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals 93-99 Ltd[2013] 358 ITR 323 (Gujarat) Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur Bench 15 Career Point Limited Versus The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, 100-132 Udaipur ITA No. 242/JPR/2023 A.Y. 2018-19 order dated 25-08-2023 16 M/s. Ruby Merry Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT (OSD) Central Circle-3, Jaipur 133-136 2016 (10) TMI 1278 17 DCIT Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/s. AU Financiers India Ltd.…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 2067/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 2066/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1783/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1782/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1),, VADODARA vs. AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,, VADODARA

ITA 1594/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1291/AHD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.,,BARODA vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1(1)(1),, BARODA

ITA 1290/AHD/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

ITA 1773/AHD/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ACIT.,CIRCLE-1(1),, BARODA

ITA 1772/AHD/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Dec 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं/ िनधा"रण वष"/ Sl. Appeal(S) By :

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)Section 40A(7)Section 43B

…at the own funds are greater than the investments which as on 31-3-2002 stood at Share Capital Rs.6491.87 lakh and Reserves and Surplus at Rs.4350.14 lakh. The AR placed reliance on following judicial precedents: 1. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 358 ITR 323 (Guj) 2. India Gelatine & Chemicals Ltd. 376 ITR 553 (Guj) 3. South Indian Bank Ltd. 438 ITR 1 (SC) 53. On the other hand, the DR relied on the order of AO and CIT(A). The DR specifically pointed out that both AO and CIT(A) have concluded that disallowance on account of administrative and miscellaneous expenditure has been incurred by the assess…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 303/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…question as under: 7. So far as issue Nos.(iii) and (iv) are concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income taxI v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., reported in (2013) 358 ITR 323 (Gujarat) Where this court has held in paragraph Nos.6 to 6.5 this court has observed as under: 6. So far as the fourth question is concerned, it pertains to addition of Rs.1,14,43,040/ under Section 115JB of the Act being the expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act. 6.1 The Assessing Officer on referring…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 302/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…question as under: 7. So far as issue Nos.(iii) and (iv) are concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income taxI v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., reported in (2013) 358 ITR 323 (Gujarat) Where this court has held in paragraph Nos.6 to 6.5 this court has observed as under: 6. So far as the fourth question is concerned, it pertains to addition of Rs.1,14,43,040/ under Section 115JB of the Act being the expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act. 6.1 The Assessing Officer on referring…

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 199/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…question as under: 7. So far as issue Nos.(iii) and (iv) are concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income taxI v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., reported in (2013) 358 ITR 323 (Gujarat) Where this court has held in paragraph Nos.6 to 6.5 this court has observed as under: 6. So far as the fourth question is concerned, it pertains to addition of Rs.1,14,43,040/ under Section 115JB of the Act being the expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act. 6.1 The Assessing Officer on referring…

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 198/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…question as under: 7. So far as issue Nos.(iii) and (iv) are concerned, the learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income taxI v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., reported in (2013) 358 ITR 323 (Gujarat) Where this court has held in paragraph Nos.6 to 6.5 this court has observed as under: 6. So far as the fourth question is concerned, it pertains to addition of Rs.1,14,43,040/ under Section 115JB of the Act being the expenditure estimated on earning of dividend income under Section 14A of the Act. 6.1 The Assessing Officer on referring…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA vs. M/S. SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LTD.,, MUMBAI

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 741/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…e following Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. case law by observing as follows: “9. Before dilating further on this issue, a reference needs to be made in this regard to the decision in case of CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 323/217 Taxman 229/36 taxmann.com 230 (Guj.) wherein question was with regard to payment to financial consultants for professional services in connection with the corporation debt restructuring by negotiating with Banks and Financial Institutions. Such expenditure was considered for the purpose of business and allowable in entirety in the year in whi…

SUN PHARMA LABORATORIES LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1),, BARODA

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 712/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…e following Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. case law by observing as follows: “9. Before dilating further on this issue, a reference needs to be made in this regard to the decision in case of CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 323/217 Taxman 229/36 taxmann.com 230 (Guj.) wherein question was with regard to payment to financial consultants for professional services in connection with the corporation debt restructuring by negotiating with Banks and Financial Institutions. Such expenditure was considered for the purpose of business and allowable in entirety in the year in whi…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), VADODARA vs. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 293/AHD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Aug 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ith the company, if the interest free funds were sufficient to meet the investments and therefore, interest was deductible. Similar view has been taken by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. [2013] 358 ITR 323/36 taxmann.com 230/217 Taxman 229 (Guj.). Applying the ratio/law laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra) as well as Division Bench of this Court in the case of Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. (supra) to the facts of the case on hand and when it has been found that the assessee was havin…

Showing 1–20 of 80 · Page 1 of 4