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 366,470 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.

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 530/BANG/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. Asst.Year Appellant Respondent 530/Bang/2010 2005-06 Canara Bank, BSCA Joint CIT,LTU, Section, FM&S Wing, Bangalore. HO, No.112, JC Road, Bangalore-560002. 479/Bang/2009 2006-07 -do- Addl.CIT, LTU Bangalore. 793/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 693/Bang/2012 2008-09 -do- -do- 601/Bang/2010 2005-06 Joint CIT,LTU, Canara Bank, Bangalore. Bangalore. 530/Bang/2009 2006-07 Addl.CIT,LTU,B’lore. -do- 813/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 684/Bang/2012 2008-09 Joint CIT, LTU,B’lo…

Addl.CIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 530/BANG/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. Asst.Year Appellant Respondent 530/Bang/2010 2005-06 Canara Bank, BSCA Joint CIT,LTU, Section, FM&S Wing, Bangalore. HO, No.112, JC Road, Bangalore-560002. 479/Bang/2009 2006-07 -do- Addl.CIT, LTU Bangalore. 793/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 693/Bang/2012 2008-09 -do- -do- 601/Bang/2010 2005-06 Joint CIT,LTU, Canara Bank, Bangalore. Bangalore. 530/Bang/2009 2006-07 Addl.CIT,LTU,B’lore. -do- 813/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 684/Bang/2012 2008-09 Joint CIT, LTU,B’lo…

M/S. Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 479/BANG/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. Asst.Year Appellant Respondent 530/Bang/2010 2005-06 Canara Bank, BSCA Joint CIT,LTU, Section, FM&S Wing, Bangalore. HO, No.112, JC Road, Bangalore-560002. 479/Bang/2009 2006-07 -do- Addl.CIT, LTU Bangalore. 793/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 693/Bang/2012 2008-09 -do- -do- 601/Bang/2010 2005-06 Joint CIT,LTU, Canara Bank, Bangalore. Bangalore. 530/Bang/2009 2006-07 Addl.CIT,LTU,B’lore. -do- 813/Bang/2011 2007-08 -do- -do- 684/Bang/2012 2008-09 Joint CIT, LTU,B’lo…

Kiran Gems P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7403/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2008-09 M/S Kiran Gems Private Ltd. Addl.Cit-5(2), Fe 5011, Bharat Diamond Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ Bourse, G-Block, M.K. Road, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 Pan No.Aadck1665M (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…i) of the Act without appreciating the facts that own funds were utilized for acquisition of capital asset and not the borrowed funds. Reliance was placed by the assessee upon the decision from Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) order dated 23/07/2014 and also writ petition in HDFC Bank Ltd. vs DCIT (W.P. no.1753 of 2016) order dated 25/02/2016. 2.2. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri M. Murli, merely relied upon the decision of the Assessing Officer/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 3 M/s Kiran Gems P. Ltd. 2.3. We have considered the rival submissions and…

Swetal N. Desai, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 7322/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Mehul ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra

…nts made by the assessee in the sister concern even assuming them to be interest free advances. Thus, applying the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Reliance Utilities and Power Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and CIT v/s HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom.), no disallowance of interest expenditure could be made. Even otherwise also, it is not a fact that the assessee has made interest free advance. It is proved on record that assessee has charged interest on the advance made @ 12%. In the aforesaid view of the matter, we hold that no disallowance 8 Shri Swetal N. Desai out of interest expend…

DCIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Enercon India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4089/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6751/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Enercon India Limited, –Range 8(1), Enercon Tower, A-9, Room No.210, Veera Industrial Estate, फनधभ/ Aayakar Bhavan, Veera Desai Road, Vs. M.K.Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri J P Bairagra
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(a)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “ई” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री सी. एन.प्रसाद, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6751/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Enercon India Limited, –Range 8(1), Enercon Tower, A-9, Room No.210, Veera Industrial Estate, फनधभ/ Aayakar Bhavan, Veera Desai Road, Vs. M.K.Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4089/Mum/…

A.C.I.T. 8(1), Mumbai vs. Enercon India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6751/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6751/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Enercon India Limited, –Range 8(1), Enercon Tower, A-9, Room No.210, Veera Industrial Estate, फनधभ/ Aayakar Bhavan, Veera Desai Road, Vs. M.K.Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri J P Bairagra
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(a)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “ई” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री सी. एन.प्रसाद, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6751/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Enercon India Limited, –Range 8(1), Enercon Tower, A-9, Room No.210, Veera Industrial Estate, फनधभ/ Aayakar Bhavan, Veera Desai Road, Vs. M.K.Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4089/Mum/…

Welspun Fintrade P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7443/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.7443/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम/ M/S. Welspun Fintrade The Dy. Cit-7(3), Pvt. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Trade World, B-Wing, Mumbai-400 020 9Th Floor, Kamala Mills Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai-40 013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacw 2877J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Mitesh Shah ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Asghar Zain सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :10.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement :02.03.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per C.N. Prasad, Jm: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-13, Mumbai Dated 04.12.2013 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Only Issue In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 10,57,359/- Made By The Ao U/S. 14A R.W. Rule 8D Of I.T. Rules.

For Appellant: Shri Mitesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Asghar Zain
Section 14A

…st should M/s Welspun Steel Ltd ITA No. 7630/Mum/2011 ITA : 8294/Mum/2011 ITAs : 6371 to 6376/Mum/2014 ITAs : 6304 to 6308/Mum/2014 18 be made and this view stands covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC bank Ltd., reported in 366 ITR 505 (Bom). Accordingly, the AO is directed to verify this contention and grant relief so far as interest disallowance is concerned. Further, the AO is also directed to apply the principles laid down by Delhi High Court in the case Chem Invest inasmuch as if there is no exempt income then, no disallowance should be made. Accordingly, with this directi…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 740/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 393/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 391/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1)

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3448/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1)

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3447/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3415/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Ramlal Negi (JM) I.T.A. No. 3415/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3416/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 2000-01) I.T.A. No. 393/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2001-02) I.T.A. No. 391/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2002-03) DCIT Range 3(1) Vs. M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. Room No. 623 (erstwhile ICICI Ltd.) 6th Floor ICICI Towers Aayakar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex M.K. Road Bandra East Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 051. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3447/Mum/2004 (Assessment Year 1999-2000) I.T.A. No. 3448/Mum/2004 (Assessm…

Lee & Muirhead P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6518/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 7435 /Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax -Range 2(2) बनधम/ Room No. 548, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg, Vs. Fort Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai 400023. Mumbai 400020. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 7849/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax (Osd) Circle 2(2), बनधम/ Room No. 545, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Fort, Mumbai 400020. Mumbai 400023. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacl0918M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 6518/Mum/2012 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax -Range 2(2) बनधम/ Room No. 548, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg, Vs. Fort Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai 400023. Mumbai 400020. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aaaclo918M & Other Two Appeals.

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamal
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…ngly. Thus the additions of Rs. 5,50,586/- made rule 8D(2)(ii) as confirmed by CIT(A) is ordered to be deleted by following the ratio laid down in the case of CIT V/s Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), and CIT V/s HDFC BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom). In respect of Rs. 14,61,622/-, the disallowance under rule 8D(2)(iii) we find that the investments were made in the mutual funds by the portfolio management companies. Further in the schedule M pertaining to Administrative and Selling Expenses the total of Rs. 14,91,12,604/- were charged whereas personnel cost in schedule no L Rs. 12,47,94…

Arj Shares & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG. 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1473/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1473/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 55(2)(ab)

…ds of the assesse i.e. share capital + reserves are sufficient to cover up the value of investments. In order to support the said contention, reliance is placed on the following decisions. a) CIT v. Reliance Utilities [313 ITR 340 (Bom)] b) CIT v. HDFC Bank [366 ITR 505 (Bom)] c) M/s. Alchemic Financila Services Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT in ITA No. 6349/Mum/11 for A.Y. 2008-09.” 8. After analyzing the afore mentioned findings we are of the view that it has been rightly held that as per specific provisions of section 55(2)(ab) of the Act, the cost of acquisition in relation to equity shares allotted to a shareholder un…

Martin & Harris Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 501/MUM/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Sachchidanand Dube
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)

…ut of these funds only. In support of his contention, strong reliance was placed on Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. reported in [2009] 313 ITR 34 (Bom); in the case of CIT v HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Thus, he argued that no disallowance should be made. 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and submitted that onus is on the assessee to show that the borrowed funds were not utilized for giving advances to the concerned persons. 5. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the impugned orders, we fin…

Wind World Wind Farms (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2712/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2712/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Wind World Wind Farms बनाम/ The Deputy Commissioner (India) Ltd., Of Income Tax- Range 8(1), V. (Formerly Known As Enercon Aayakar Bhavan, Wind Farms (India) Ltd.), Maharshi Karve Road, Wind World Tower, Mumbai- 400 020. Plot No. A-9, Veera Industrial Estate, Veera Desai Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 400 053. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaace3530A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.P. BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…since there is no dividend received by the assessee during the year, the ratio laid in the above case is applicable to the present case. The assessee company also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. HDFC Bank Limited , 366 ITR 505(Bom.). 8. The ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied upon the orders of authorities below and submitted that the A.O. has rightly applied Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules ,1962 in the case of the assessee company to make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. He submitted that disallowance of expenses which are attributable for earning exempt income is to be…

Jagdish Ahuja, Mumbai vs. JCIT (OSD) WD 13(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 7285/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Jagdish Ahuja, Jcit (Osd), A/201, Rajpipla, Ward 13(3), Linking Road, Mumbai Vs. Santacruz (W), Opp. Std Chtd. Bank, Mumbai – 400 054 Pan: Aadpa 6128J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Reepal Tralshawalla, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Vinod Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 03.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 05.02.2016 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Reepal Tralshawalla, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, D.R
Section 14A

…y fresh investments were made during the year and no administrative expenditure was incurred for the purpose of earning of dividend income. The Ld. A.R., in this respect, has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “HDFC Bank” 366 ITR 505. He has relied upon various other judicial decisions also to stress on the point that where the assessee is in the business of financing and there is a net positive income, then under such circumstances, no interest disallowance is warranted in relation to investments made out of the own/interest free funds available with the assessee. Considerin…