CIT v. Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.

319 ITR 75High Court2009#24591 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Judgments citing CIT v. Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd.

IND SWIFT LABORATORIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated

ITA 350/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri T.N.Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 250Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(2)

…the Commissioner. ITA 350/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 33 35.10. It was held that the commercial expediency in advancing the amount was established beyond doubt. 35.11. It was observed that in 'CIT versus Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Limited', (2009) 319 ITR 75 (P&H), it had been held that section 36(1)(iii) of the Act provides that the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purposes of business or profession has to be allowed as a deduction in computing the income under section 28 of the Act; that the expression " for the purpose of business" has been held to be wider in scope…

DCIT CIR 6(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AMMA LINES P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 94/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar YadavFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…e assessee. The M/s. Amma Lines Pvt. Ltd. assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 and the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. 319 ITR 75. However, the AO was not convinced with the contention of the assessee on the ground that the test of availability of funds is not the decisive factor under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act and thus denied the claim of the assessee and disallowed interest on proportionate basis @12% at `11,07,85,343/- which comes to around Rs.1,32,94,241/- and added…

DCIT CIR 6(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. AMMA LINES P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 93/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Kumar YadavFor Respondent: Shri Mani Jain
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…e assessee. The M/s. Amma Lines Pvt. Ltd. assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 and the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. 319 ITR 75. However, the AO was not convinced with the contention of the assessee on the ground that the test of availability of funds is not the decisive factor under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act and thus denied the claim of the assessee and disallowed interest on proportionate basis @12% at `11,07,85,343/- which comes to around Rs.1,32,94,241/- and added…

CIT v. Marudhar Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. (319 ITR 75) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax