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 367,154 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.

DCIT-CC-7(3), Aaykar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Arihant Premises Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, ground Nos

ITA 1602/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharshi & Shri Anikesh Banerjeedcit-Cc-7(3), Vs Arihant Premises Private Limited Room No-655, Aayakar Bhavan, 412, Floor-4, Vardhaman Chamber Maharishi Karve Road, Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Mumbai-400 020 Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan : Aaaca7260K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj ShethFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha (SRDR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…tune of Rs.5.83 Cr, which proved that the investments of Rs.7.8 lakhs had been made out of its own funds. Relying upon the decisions of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the cases of Reliance Power and Utilities Ltd. v. CIT (313 ITR 340) and HDFC Bank Ltd. v. CIT (366 ITR 505), the appellant contended before the AO that no disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D was called for in its case. However, the AO held that the contention of the appellant that the investments had been made out of own funds is not acceptable for the reasons that (i) the appellant had borrowed huge funds from financial institutions and group con…

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

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 885/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…for this. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Hence, we remit this issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose and he will verify whether the interest free funds are available with the assessee, which is more than the interest free advances given to Rane Foundation. In term of the above, this issue is allowed in both the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 subject to verificati…

Rane Engine Valve Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 2815/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…for this. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Hence, we remit this issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose and he will verify whether the interest free funds are available with the assessee, which is more than the interest free advances given to Rane Foundation. In term of the above, this issue is allowed in both the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 subject to verificati…

Rane Engine Valve Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1477/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…for this. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Hence, we remit this issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose and he will verify whether the interest free funds are available with the assessee, which is more than the interest free advances given to Rane Foundation. In term of the above, this issue is allowed in both the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 subject to verificati…

Rane Engine Valves Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1498/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…for this. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Hence, we remit this issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose and he will verify whether the interest free funds are available with the assessee, which is more than the interest free advances given to Rane Foundation. In term of the above, this issue is allowed in both the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 subject to verificati…

Rane Engine Valves Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1497/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…for this. This issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in [2014] 366 ITR 505. Hence, we remit this issue back to the file of the AO for verification purpose and he will verify whether the interest free funds are available with the assessee, which is more than the interest free advances given to Rane Foundation. In term of the above, this issue is allowed in both the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 subject to verificati…

ACIT, Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Living Media India Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 1091/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. G.S. Pannu & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2018-19 Acit Vs. Living Media India Ltd. Circle – 13 (1) K-9, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 Pan No.Aaacl0087H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…situation where the own funds are more than the investment in exempt assets, no disallowance can be made out of the interest expenditure. This has been the view of the e Bombay High Court in Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) and HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505). It has most recently been followed by the Delhi Bench of ITAT in the Motors LTD. (154 ITD 306). Accordingly in my view no disallowance of case of T&T interest expenditure u/s 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii) is warranted. 8.2.2 Coming to the issue of disallowance of administrative expenses, the AR has pointed out that, despite offering a sum of Rs…

Bajaj Holdngs & Investment Ltd ( Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3043/MUM/2010[2002-013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-013

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…P a g e | 1 ITA No.3043 & 2899/Mum/2010 Bajaj Holdings & Investments Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range 3(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. of Income-tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent DCIT-3(4) Vs. M/s Bajaj Holding and Room No. 481-2, 4th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Ers…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Bajaj Auto Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 2899/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhbajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. Of Income-Tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Dcit-3(4) Vs. M/S Bajaj Holding & Room No. 481-2, 4Th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Erstwhile Bajaj Auto Ltd) Mumbai – 400020 226, Bajaj Bhavan, 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aaacb3370K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Percy Pardiwala & Vasanti Patel Respondent By : Ankush Kapoor

For Appellant: Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Ankush Kapoor
Section 143(3)Section 2(47)

…P a g e | 1 ITA No.3043 & 2899/Mum/2010 Bajaj Holdings & Investments Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range 3(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bajaj Holdings & Vs. Additional Commissioner Investment Ltd. of Income-tax, Range 3(1) Erstwile Bajaj Auto Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, Bajaj Bhavan, 226, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No:AAACB3370K Appellant .. Respondent DCIT-3(4) Vs. M/s Bajaj Holding and Room No. 481-2, 4th Floor, Investment Limited Aaykar Bhavan, (Ers…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3031/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3030/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3004/MUM/2023[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

Jsw Cement Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1148/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble& Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year 2016-17 M/S.Jsw Cement Limited, 3Rd Floor, Jsw Centre, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai 400 051. Pan:Aabcj-6731-B - Appellant

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita ShahFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon –SR.DR
Section 115JSection 14A

…the assessee that the own funds available with the assessee is more than the value of investments and hence no disallowance of interest expenditure is required to be made as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd (366 ITR 505). We examined the Balance Sheet of the assessee and notice that the own funds available with the assessee as on 31-03-2016 was Rs.422.31 crores, while the value of investment stood at Rs.2.42 crores as on that date. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd (supra) that, when the own funds available with the assessee exc…

ACIT-14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Vidarbha Industries Power Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 1491/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year :2016-17 Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. Reliance Centre, Ground Floor, 19 Walchand Hirachand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan:Aadcr-1892-D ---- Appellant Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2) Mumbai. [Erstwhile Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Cir.14(3)(1)] Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 --- Respondent Assessment Year :2016-17 Acit-14(1)(2), Mumbai. Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 …. Appellant Vs. Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. H-Block, First Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710. …. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit KhatiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Meena, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 14A

…respectively, while the value of investments stand at Rs.44.25 crores in the beginning and end of the year. Hence, no disallowance out of interest expenses is called for as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd ((366 ITR 505). ASSESSMENT YEAR :2016-17 7. The next contention of the assessee is that the “average value of investments” for the purpose of Rule 8D should be computed by considering only those investments which have yielded exempt income. In this regard, the ld.A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Special bench of ITAT in the case of Vire…

Vidarbha Industries Power Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1419/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year :2016-17 Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. Reliance Centre, Ground Floor, 19 Walchand Hirachand Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan:Aadcr-1892-D ---- Appellant Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 14(1)(2) Mumbai. [Erstwhile Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Cir.14(3)(1)] Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 --- Respondent Assessment Year :2016-17 Acit-14(1)(2), Mumbai. Room No.455, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020 …. Appellant Vs. Vidarbha Industries Power Ltd. H-Block, First Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Thane Belapur Road, Koperkhairane, Navi Mumbai 400 710. …. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Amit KhatiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Meena, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 14A

…respectively, while the value of investments stand at Rs.44.25 crores in the beginning and end of the year. Hence, no disallowance out of interest expenses is called for as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd ((366 ITR 505). ASSESSMENT YEAR :2016-17 7. The next contention of the assessee is that the “average value of investments” for the purpose of Rule 8D should be computed by considering only those investments which have yielded exempt income. In this regard, the ld.A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by the Special bench of ITAT in the case of Vire…

Tashi India Limited, Nagpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circl-2, Nagpur

Appeal is partly allowed in above

ITA 98/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.98/NAG./2023 Assessment Year 2014-2015 Tashi India Limited, DCIT, Circle-2, 254, Pandit Ravi Shankar Aayakar Bhavan, Shukla Marg, Civil Lines, Civil Lines, vs. Nagpur – 440 001. Nagpur. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN AAACT6366P PIN – 440 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rajesh Loya, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 15.05.2024 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for asse…

Smita Conductors Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - 3(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4721/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal: A.Y : 2013-14 Smita Conductors Private Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 1402/03, Raheja Centre, Free Tax-3(3)(2), Mumbai. Press Road, Nariman Point, (Respondent) Mumbai 400 021. Pan : Aaacs5379K (Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil HirawatFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon
Section 115JSection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER : A.Y : 2013-14 Smita Conductors Private Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income 1402/03, Raheja Centre, Free Tax-3(3)(2), Mumbai. Press Road, Nariman Point, (Respondent) Mumbai 400 021. PAN : AAACS5379K (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri Sunil Hirawat Respondent by : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon Date of Hearing : 09/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10/05/2024 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 05-…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Net 4 India Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2097/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 DCIT, Vs. M/s. Net 4 India Ltd., Circle-18(1), AB-11, Community Centre, New Delhi Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi PAN :AAACT0291M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Saurabh Anand, Sr. DR Date of hearing 06.05.2024 Date of pronouncement 10.05.2024 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, VICE-PRESIDENT This is an appeal by the Revenue against order dated 27.01.2017 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-42, New Delhi, perta…

DCIT 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 4786/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…securities and bonds of the assessee which had yielded exempt income. Hence, by placing reliance on the decision 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, there cannot be any disallowance on account of interest on borrowed funds u/s.14A of the Act. However, certain administrative expenses certainly need to be disallowed u/s.14A of the Act as the law has been amended with retrospective amendment from 01/04/1962 onwards. In this regard, we find that the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT…

The Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd., Mumbai vs. Jt. Director of Income Tax (International Taxation) - Range -3, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed wherein

ITA 4765/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 10(15)(iv)Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…securities and bonds of the assessee which had yielded exempt income. Hence, by placing reliance on the decision 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, there cannot be any disallowance on account of interest on borrowed funds u/s.14A of the Act. However, certain administrative expenses certainly need to be disallowed u/s.14A of the Act as the law has been amended with retrospective amendment from 01/04/1962 onwards. In this regard, we find that the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT…