CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.

366 ITR 505High Court2014#34 most cited

What is CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. authority for?

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

1,261

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,282 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v HDFC Bank Ltd · 366 ITR 505 · Section 14A disallowance · interest expenditure · exempt income · interest-free funds · own funds · presumption · sufficiency of funds · dividend income · Rule 8D

Also reported as

49 Taxmann.com 335226 Taxmann 132107 DTR 140

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 37(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 8DSection 10(34)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

disallowance of interest expendituredisallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14abook profitsrevenue expendituresection 115jsection 115jbsection 32capital expendituresection 37(1)section 36

Judgments citing CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.

ACIT, Madurai vs. J.K.Fenner (India) Ltd., Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1078/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

ACIT, Madurai vs. J.K.Fenner (India) Ltd., Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1077/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

ACIT, Madurai vs. J.K.Fenner (India) Ltd., Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1076/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

J.K.Fenner (India) Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT, Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1063/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

J.K.Fenner (India) Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT, Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1062/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

J.K.Fenner (India) Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT, Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1061/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

J.K.Fenner (India) Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT, Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1060/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

J.K.Fenner (India) Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT, Madurai

Appeal stand dismissed whereas the assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1059/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)

…s were higher than the investment in tax-free securities, it would have to be presumed that investments made by the assessee would be out of interest-free funds available with the assessee and no disallowance was warranted u/s 14A-CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom), CIT V. Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT v. Hotel Savera 239 ITR 735 (Mad). 2.9 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that the investment in M/s Modern Cotton Yarn Sinners Ltd. and M/s Southern Spinners and processors Ltd represent strategic investments. Further, no dividend was received fr…

Mr. Subhash Goel, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 565/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 14A

…also contended that the assessee has enough capital and interest free funds to invest in partnership firms. The assessee had relied on the following judgments :- (i) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.-HC). (ii) CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.- HC). 7. This submission of the assessee did not find favour with the Assessing Officer. He opined that the provisions of section 14A were applicable in all cases where the assessee has earned exempt income and it did not exclude any such case of exempt income from the ambit of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer held tha…

Rajendra Sitaram Goel, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 535/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 14A

…also contended that the assessee has enough capital and interest free funds to invest in partnership firms. The assessee had relied on the following judgments :- (i) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.-HC). (ii) CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.- HC). 7. This submission of the assessee did not find favour with the Assessing Officer. He opined that the provisions of section 14A were applicable in all cases where the assessee has earned exempt income and it did not exclude any such case of exempt income from the ambit of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer held tha…

Mr. Annuj Goel, (Legal Heir of Late Umesh Goel), Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 564/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 14A

…also contended that the assessee has enough capital and interest free funds to invest in partnership firms. The assessee had relied on the following judgments :- (i) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.-HC). (ii) CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.- HC). 7. This submission of the assessee did not find favour with the Assessing Officer. He opined that the provisions of section 14A were applicable in all cases where the assessee has earned exempt income and it did not exclude any such case of exempt income from the ambit of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer held tha…

Annuj Goel, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 7, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 403/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Krishna GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Section 14A

…also contended that the assessee has enough capital and interest free funds to invest in partnership firms. The assessee had relied on the following judgments :- (i) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.-HC). (ii) CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.- HC). 7. This submission of the assessee did not find favour with the Assessing Officer. He opined that the provisions of section 14A were applicable in all cases where the assessee has earned exempt income and it did not exclude any such case of exempt income from the ambit of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer held tha…

Rane Holdings Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle-5(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 650/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…funds available with it in the shape of Share capital and Reserves and Surplus and once these interest free funds are available with the assessee, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd, 366 ITR 505, wherein it was held that it would have to be presumed that the investment made by assessee would be out of the interest free funds available with the assessee. According to ld.counsel, this issue is covered by the decision of HDFC Bank Ltd., supra. I.T.A. No.650/Chny/2020 6 5.2 As regards disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) regarding administrat…

Hdfc Bank Ltd (Successor to Businss of Centurion Bank of Punjab Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 374/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Hon’Ble) & Shri Saktijit Dey (Hon’Ble)

Section 14A

…ade, the Hon’ble High Court, while deciding the writ application filed by the assessee against the order of the Tribunal, relied upon its own 7 decision in case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and CIT vs HDFC Bank Ltd (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom) to observe that where the assessee has a common pool of funds, it has to be presumed that the investment made is out of the interest free funds available with the assessee. He submitted, while drawing such presumption, availability of interest free funds as on the date of balance-sheet has to be seen. He submitted, the aforesaid legal princ…

K R Pradeep, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 416/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Mrs. Girija G.P., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…of the I.T. Rules should be deleted. We order accordingly." Thereafter, it was held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court as under:- “The aforesaid shows that the Tribunal has followed a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505/226 Taxman 132 (Mag.)/49 taxmann.com 335 . When the issue is already covered by a decision of the High Court of Bombay with which we concur, we do not find any substantial question of law would arise for consideration as canvassed.” Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the issue of disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of I…

K R Pradeep, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cirlce-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 415/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Mrs. Girija G.P., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…of the I.T. Rules should be deleted. We order accordingly." Thereafter, it was held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court as under:- “The aforesaid shows that the Tribunal has followed a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505/226 Taxman 132 (Mag.)/49 taxmann.com 335 . When the issue is already covered by a decision of the High Court of Bombay with which we concur, we do not find any substantial question of law would arise for consideration as canvassed.” Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the issue of disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of I…

K R Pradeep, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 414/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Mrs. Girija G.P., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…of the I.T. Rules should be deleted. We order accordingly." Thereafter, it was held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court as under:- “The aforesaid shows that the Tribunal has followed a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505/226 Taxman 132 (Mag.)/49 taxmann.com 335 . When the issue is already covered by a decision of the High Court of Bombay with which we concur, we do not find any substantial question of law would arise for consideration as canvassed.” Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the issue of disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of I…

K R Pradeep, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 is allowed

ITA 413/BANG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri B.R. Baskaran

For Appellant: Mrs. Girija G.P., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…of the I.T. Rules should be deleted. We order accordingly." Thereafter, it was held by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court as under:- “The aforesaid shows that the Tribunal has followed a decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505/226 Taxman 132 (Mag.)/49 taxmann.com 335 . When the issue is already covered by a decision of the High Court of Bombay with which we concur, we do not find any substantial question of law would arise for consideration as canvassed.” Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) on the issue of disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of I…

ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela vs. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 373/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)

…t of Rs.90.00 crores and there was no scope for appellant to utilise the loan fund otherwise or for making investment for earning exempt income. 64. Further, ld A.R. placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank, 366 ITR 505 (Bom), wherein, it is held that where the assessee’s capital net profit, reserve, surplus and current account deposit were higher than investment in tax free securities, it would have to be presumed that the investment made by the assessee would be out of interest free fund, available with the assessee. Ld AR pressing into service this propositio…

Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela

In the result, appeals of the revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 366/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: S/ S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Manish Borad & Manish Borad & Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela. Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No. No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessment Year : 2015-16 C.O. No.01/Ctk/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) (Arising Out Of Ita No.373/Ctk/2018) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Indrani Indrani Patnaik, Patnaik, A/6, A/6, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Asst. Commissioner Of Income Commercial Commercial Estate, Estate, Civil Civil Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Tax, Rourkela Circle, Rourkela Township, Rourkela Township, Rourkela-769004 Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E Pan/Gir No.Accpp 6164 E (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.C. Bhadra S.C. Bhadra , Ar Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20 /10/ 20 / 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10 / 12 12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench The Cross The Cross Appeals Filed By The Revenue & Assessee Assessee Are Directed Against The Or Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 Der Of The Cit(A), Sambalpur Dated 2.7.2018 For The P A G E 1 | 62

For Appellant: Shri S.C. BhadraFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)

…t of Rs.90.00 crores and there was no scope for appellant to utilise the loan fund otherwise or for making investment for earning exempt income. 64. Further, ld A.R. placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank, 366 ITR 505 (Bom), wherein, it is held that where the assessee’s capital net profit, reserve, surplus and current account deposit were higher than investment in tax free securities, it would have to be presumed that the investment made by the assessee would be out of interest free fund, available with the assessee. Ld AR pressing into service this propositio…