How many judgments cite CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.?

1,261 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 37(1), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 8D.

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 367,368 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 14A Section 143(3)Section 115JB Section 37(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 8D Section 10(34)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

disallowance of interest expenditure disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 14a book profits revenue expenditure section 115j section 115jb section 32 capital expenditure section 37(1)section 36

Judgments citing CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.

Il & Fs Transportation Networks Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Range - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4177/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodil & Fs Transportation Networks Asstt. Commissioner Of Limited, The Il & Fs Financial Income-Tax, Range -14(2)(1), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Vs. 460, 4Th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Road, Marine Lines, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 Pan – Aabcc5460A (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit -14(2)(1), M/S Il & Fs Transportation Network 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., Il & Fs Financial Centre, 8Th Vs. Mumbai – 400 020 Floor, C-22, G Block, B.K.C. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…grounds of appeal before us : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in advising the AO to follow the decision in the case of HDFC Bank, Mumbai vs DCIT-2(3), Mumbai & Ors Dt. 25.02.2016 r.w. CIT vs HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom.)(HC) while calculating the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D, without considering the fact that the order of HDFC Bank did not address the aspect of determination of disallowance u/s 14A as per rule 8D which was applicable from A.Y. 2008-09 onward. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in advising the AO…

ACIT, Circle-7 (3)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Prime Securities Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5218/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 5218/MUM/2019 (A.Y: 20131-14) ACIT – Circle -7(3)(2) v. M/s. Prime Securities Ltd., Room No. 128A, 1st Floor 1109/1110, 11th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Maker Chambers-5 Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 PAN: AAACP4089M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri J.P. Bairagra Department by : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi Date of Hearing : 10.02.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 10.02.2021 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This ap…

Anrak Aluminium Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

Appeal is partly allowed in foregoing terms

ITA 994/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghuram, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Anjala Sahu, DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…Rs.7,49,10,320/- of reserves and surplus; respectively. Meaning thereby that assessee’s non-interest bearing funds exceed more than its exempt income’s investment. We quote CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., [313 ITR 340] and CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Limited [366 ITR 505] (Bom) that the necessary presumption that flow in such an instance is that of utilisation of non-interest bearing funds only in deriving exempt income. We go by this process reason :- 3 -: alone to delete proportionate interest expenditure disallowance of Rs.3,37,63,307/-. 5. This leaves us with the third limb of administrative expenditure dis…

Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1431/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.1431 /Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income- Colgate Research Centre, Main Vs. Tax-10(3) Street, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai – 400076

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

…e interest expenditure could have been attributed to the earning of the exempt income by the assessee during the year in question. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom). Accordingly, in terms of our aforesaid observations, we herein vacate the disallowance made by the A.O under Sec. 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) of Rs.14,30,932/-. As regards the disallowance made by the A.O under Sec. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii) of Rs.12,61,261/-, we find substantial force in the claim of the ld. A.R that the investments which had n…

DCIT 10(3), Mumbai vs. Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1350/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2021AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwalla, Senior Advocate a/w ShriFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Deshpande, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8o

The Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Mahaveer Calyx

ITA/825/2017HC Karnataka05 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(3)Section 260Section 80I

…IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA I.T.A. NO.825/2017 BETWEEN 1. THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(3)(3), BENGALURU. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SANMATHI.E.I, ADVOCATE) AND M/S MAHAVEER CALYX NO.9,MAHAVEER HOMES 24TH MAIN, 6TH PHASE J.P NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI A.SHANKAR, SR.ADVOCATE FOR SRI M.LAVA, ADVOCATE) T…

ACIT, Central Circle, Bikaner vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, Sriganganagar

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 45/JODH/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, 4-A-15, Central Circle, Jawahar Nagar, Bikaner. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aiepg 8893 R

Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.C.I.T. Vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, 4-A-15, Central Circle, Jawahar Nagar, Bikaner. Sriganganagar. PAN No. AIEPG 8893 R Revenue by Shri K.C. Badhok, CIT DR Assessee by Shri P.C. Parwal, CA Date of Hearing 02.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement 01/02/2021 O R D E R PER BENCH The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-4, Jaipur dated 02/12/2019 for A.Y. 2017-18, wherein the Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The l…

Tarini Minerals Pvt. Ltd., Rourkela vs. ACIT, Rourkela

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 197/CTK/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Section 14A

…he loan fund otherwise or for making investment for earning exempt income. P a g e 6 | 27 ITA No.1 97/CTK/201 9 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 12- 13 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…

Il & Fs Transportation Networks Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl.CIT-14(2) (Earlier Addl.CIT, RG. 10(1)), Mumbai

ITA 2927/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.2927 & 2928/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12) Il & Fs Transportation Networks Addl. Commissioner Of Limited, The Il & Fs Financial Income-Tax, Range -14(2), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. [Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Vs. Range-10(1), Mumbai] 460, 4Th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Road, Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan – Aabcc5460A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Bhalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, D.R

Section 14A

…ctions/guidelines to be followed by the A.O while readjudicating the aforesaid issue, viz. (a) that the judgments of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT-2(3), Mumbai & Ors., dated 25.02.2016 r.w CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ld. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom) be followed in the course of the „set aside‟ proceedings; (b) that while computing the disallowance under Sec. 14A r.w. Rule 8D (2)(iii) only the investments which were made by the assessee in its non-subsidiary company that had yielded dividend income were to be considered; and (c) that the investments earning interest income were to be el…

DCIT Cent. Cir. -5(3) (Erstwhile DCIT Cent. Cir. -36), Mumbai vs. Sumer Builders, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5130/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Blem/S. Sumer Builders V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Central Circle – 5(3) 201, Commerce House {Erstwhile Dcit, Central Circle – 36} 140, Nm Road, Fort Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor Mumbai – 400 023 Air India Building, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaafs2829R

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan

Section 36(1)(iii)

…er book and relying on the judgements in the case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT [379 ITR 347 (SC)], CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340 (Bombay)] and CIT v. HDFC Bank 56 ITA NO.4915 & 5130/MUM/2016 (A.Y: 2011-12) M/s. Sumer Builders Ltd. [366 ITR 505 (Bombay)] contended that it had sufficient owned funds in order to advance the same to the sister concerns and as such no disallowance could be made u/s 36(l)(iii) of the Act on the ground of diversion of borrowed funds. He further contended that even otherwise, it was not disputed by the Assessing Officer or the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee as we…

Sumer Builders, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4915/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri A. Mohan

Section 36(1)(iii)

Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6(1), Mumbai

ITA 804/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 804 & 805/Mum/2018 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Sreekar, DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ves rise to a presumption that such investments have come out of interest free-funds. The said proposition is equally applicable in the context of section 14A of the Act, as held by Hon 'ble Bombay High Court in the case in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505(Bom) and in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Born). Therefore, in the above background, we have no hesitation to delete the disallowance of interest made by the AO under section 14A of the Act." 6.7 It could be seen from the table above that the assessee had own funds to cover all the investments made. Respectfully following the…

Nirpan Securities Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 4 (2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3941/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Nirpan Securities Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax 301-308, Bhagwati House Circle 4(2)(1), Mumbai Veera Desai Road Andheri (W) Mumbai – 400 058 Pan/Gir No.Aaacn1329A (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…terest under second limb of 8D(2) of the Rules in support of which the assessee placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in 366 ITR 505. We find that the ld. CIT(A) appreciating the said contention of the assessee directed the ld. AO to delete the disallowance of interest of Rs.45,38,317/- made under second limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. 3 M/s. Nirpan Securities Pvt. Ltd., 3.3. With regard to disallowance of administrative expenses under the third limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Ru…

Podar Advisory and Consulting Enterprise Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO - Ward- 2(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose in the terms aforesaid

ITA 7209/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 7209/मुं/2018 ("न.व.2015-16) Podar Advisory & Consulting Enterprise Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, Podar Chambers, 109, Sa Brelvi Road Fort, Mumbai 400 001 : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan:Aaacp3336K बनाम/ Vs.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…fore the CIT(A). Before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee contended that own funds of the assessee were sufficient to cover the investment made. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank ltd. vs. DCIT, 366 ITR 505 and the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs.Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340(Bom). The CIT(A) remain unimpressed with the contentions raised by the assessee and dismissed the appeal. Against the findings of CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, representing the Department vehemently def…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Assetz Infrastructure Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 983/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, D.R

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ITA No.563&983/Bang/2019 Assetz Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Assetz Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. 2/1, Second Floor, Deputy Commissioner Embassy Icon Annexe of Income-tax Infantry Road Vs. Circle-1(1)(1) Bengaluru-560 001 Bengaluru PAN NO : AAGCA7614K APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Assetz Infrastructure Deputy Commissioner of Pvt. Ltd. Income-tax 2/1, Second Floor, Embassy Vs. Circle-2(2) Icon Annexe Bengaluru In…

DCIT - 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. B E Billimoria & Co Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 3019/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3019/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) Dcit-1(1)(1) M/S. B.E.Billimoria & Co. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.533/579, 5Th Floor 2Nd Floor, Shiv Sagar Estate, A Block Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Dr.A.B.Road, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai - 400018 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb-1542-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Satish Modi-Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Oommen Tharian-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 11/11/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 11/11/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Satish Modi-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Oommen Tharian-Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 50(1)(i)Section 50C

…1 B.E.Billimoria & Co. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2015-16 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी ” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी श""जीत दे, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3019/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2015-16) DCIT-1(1)(1) M/s. B.E.Billimoria & Co. Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.533/579, 5th Floor 2nd Floor, Shiv Sagar Estate, A Block Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Dr.A.B.Road, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai - 400…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-14 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. Godrej Properties Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6486/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Godrej Properties Income Tax, Circle-14(1)(2) Limited Mumbai Ground Floor Room No.475, 4Th Floor Phirojshanagar, Aayakar Bhavan Eastern Express Highway, M.K.Road, Vikhroli East Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 079 Pan/Gir No. Aaacg3995M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) M/S. Godrej Properties Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Limited Tax, Circle-14(1)(1) Esplande House Mumbai 2Nd Floor Room No.404, 4Th Floor 29, Hazarimal Somani Aayakar Bhavan Marg, Fort, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan/Gir No. Aaacg3995M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue By Shri V. Vinodkumar Assessee By Shri Farooq V. Irani Date Of Hearing 29/10/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11/11/2020 M/S. Godrej Properties Ltd.

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…38,93,978/- and Rs 170,03,18,306/- respectively. This factual finding given by the ld CITA was not controverted by the ld DR before us. Hence by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank reported in 366 ITR 505 (Bom) ; CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and PCIT vs Shapoorji Pallonjiand Co Ltd reported in 423 ITR 220 (Bom) for the Asst Year 2010- 11 and decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of PCIT vs Sintex Industries Ltd reported in 82 taxmann.com 171 (Gujarat) for the Asst Year 2010-11, where revenue SL…

Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu (A), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2049/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Nov 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2049 / Chny / 2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Manali Petrochemicals The Dcit, Ltd., V. Ltu (Appeals), Ponneri High Road, Chennai- 34. Manali, Chennai – 600 068. Pan : Aaacm3404D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha,Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 09.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha,JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 2049 / CHNY / 2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Manali Petrochemicals The DCIT, Ltd., v. LTU (Appeals), Ponneri High Road, Chennai- 34. Manali, Chennai – 600 068. PAN : AAACM3404D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anitha,JCIT सुनवाई…

M/S. Alphagrep Securities Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1700/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am

For Appellant: Sri.C.Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri B.R.Baskaran, AM ITA No.1700/Bang/2019 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 M/s.Alphagrep Securities Pvt.Ltd. The Dy.Commissioner of Ground Floor, Frontline Grandeur Income-tax, Circle 1(1)(1) v. No.14, Walton Road Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 001. PAN : AAACW4533B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.C.Ramesh, CA Respondent by : Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT-DR Date of Date of Hearing : 04.11.2020 Pronouncement : 04.11.2020 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed…

Param Shubham Vanijya Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 5(2), Kolkata

In the result this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2501/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Madhumita Roy)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Virtual Court) (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member) I.T.A. No. 2501/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Param Shubham Vanijya Ltd...………………..…..............................................................Appellant [PAN: AABCP 5721 B] Vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Kolkata...............................................................................................Respondent Appearances by: Sh. Arvind Agarwal, Adv., appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. Supriyo Pal, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the…