CIT v. Max India Ltd.

388 ITR 81High Court2016#1674 most cited
68

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Max India Ltd. · 388 ITR 81 · Section 14A · Section 12AA(3) · Section 12AB · cancellation of registration · business expediency · Section 36(1)(iii) · charitable trust registration · income tax exemptions

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 148Section 11Section 12ASection 12AA(3)Section 12AB

Issues it is cited on

section 13asection 12aa(3)section 36(l)(iii)section 127(2)section 80msection 12ab(4)section 10(23c)(vi)cancellation of registrationsection 120section 13(1)(c)business expediencysection 13(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Max India Ltd.

Hero Moto Corp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Neac, Delhi

ITA 706/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 145Section 1lSection 80ISection 92C

…g by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: i. Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS. DCIT: 394 ITR 449(SC) ii. Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.: ITA No. 506 of 2017 dated 31.07.2017 (Guj) iii. CIT v. Max India Ltd.: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) iv. CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd.:[2013] 215 Taxman 272 (Gujarat) v. CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) vi. LubiSubmeribles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj) vii. CIT vs. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt Ltd: ITA No.1260 of 2009 viii. Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd : Tax Appeal No. 82 of 2013 (Guj HC) ix…

The South Indian Bank Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-009606-009606 - 2011Supreme Court09 Sept 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

Section 14Section 14A

…s v. CIT8 where this Court ruled on issue of disallowance in relation to funds lent to sister concern out of mixed funds. The issue in SA 5 (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj)/ 2013 SCC Online Guj 8613 6 (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Karn)/ 2016 SCC Online Kar 8490 7 (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P & H) / 2016 SCC Online P&H 6788 8 [(2007) 1 SCC 781] Page 12 of 22 Builders is pending consideration before the larger bench of this Court in SLP (C) No. 14729 of 2012 titled as Addl. CIT v. Tulip Star Hotels Ltd. The counsel therefore, argues that there is no finality on the issue of disallowance, when mixed funds are used. On this…

Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

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

ITA 1160/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L. Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1160/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Sharma, Advocate
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…d vs. DCIT 394 ITR 449, Judgments of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Bright Enterprise (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 381 ITR 107 (Pb.), CIT vs. Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (Pb.),CIT vs. Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.), CIT vs. Max India Ltd 388 ITR 81 (P&H) and the decisions of the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Group Company M/s Monte Carlo Fashion Ltd. ITANo.1341/Chd/2016 AY 2012-13. to substantiate his contention. 12. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supporting the action of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee had made addition to fixed assets amounting to Rs. 186.80…

Hero Motocrop Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 9187/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 145ASection 80ISection 92C

…finding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: - Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS. DCIT: 394 ITR 449(SC) - Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.: ITA No. 506 of 2017 dated 31.07.2017 (Guj) - CIT v. Max India Ltd.: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd.:[2013] 215 Taxman 272 (Gujarat) - CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) - Lubi Submeribles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj) - CIT vs. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt Ltd: ITA No.1260 of 2009 - Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd : Tax Appeal No. 82 of 2013 (Guj HC) - Hero Honda…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Circle, Jaipur vs. Modern School Society, Kota

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 357/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 10Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 13(3)

…der has been passed on the basis of the report of the AO for the assessment year 2013- 14. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Rajasthan and others vs. Basant Agrotech India Ltd. and others 388 ITR 81 and submitted that only a legislation can make a law retrospective and prospectively subject justifiability and acceptability within the constitutional para- meters. The subordinate legislation can be given with retrospective effect if a power in this behalf is contained in the principle Act. In the absence of such conferment of power the Governme…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Circle, Jaipur vs. Modern School Society, Kota

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1362/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 10Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 13(3)

…der has been passed on the basis of the report of the AO for the assessment year 2013- 14. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Rajasthan and others vs. Basant Agrotech India Ltd. and others 388 ITR 81 and submitted that only a legislation can make a law retrospective and prospectively subject justifiability and acceptability within the constitutional para- meters. The subordinate legislation can be given with retrospective effect if a power in this behalf is contained in the principle Act. In the absence of such conferment of power the Governme…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Circle, Jaipur vs. Modern School Society, Kota

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1361/JPR/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Sogani (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 10Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 13(1)(d)Section 13(2)(h)Section 13(3)

…der has been passed on the basis of the report of the AO for the assessment year 2013- 14. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of State of Rajasthan and others vs. Basant Agrotech India Ltd. and others 388 ITR 81 and submitted that only a legislation can make a law retrospective and prospectively subject justifiability and acceptability within the constitutional para- meters. The subordinate legislation can be given with retrospective effect if a power in this behalf is contained in the principle Act. In the absence of such conferment of power the Governme…

M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant, Kota vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 688/JPR/2019[0]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Jan 2021

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Ranka &For Respondent: Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)
Section 12ASection 133ASection 271F

…he Income Tax Act. And it is also settled legal position of law that Registration cannot be cancelled from retrospective effects. In this regard, he has relied upon the following decisions: State of Rajasthan and others vs Basant Agrotech India Ltd. and other 388 ITR 81(SC) Indian Medical Trust V/s PCIT (Central) 2019 (6) TMI 996 (Rajasthan) Oxford Academy for Career Development Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax: (2009) 315 ITR 382 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Agra Development Authority: (2018) 90 Taxman 288 CIT V/s Manav Vikas Avam Sewa Sansthan 336 ITR 250 (All) 5.1 No cancellation of Registration u/s…

The Sonepat Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Sonepat vs. ACIT, Sonepat Circle, Sonepat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4105/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nd that a coordinate bench of this Tribunal while dealing with similar set of facts and circumstances and relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Harayana High Court in the case of CIT vs Hero Cycles, (2010) 189 Taxman 50 and CIT vs Max India (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H), recorded a finding of fact that a presumption would arise that investment would be out of the interest free funds generated or available with the company and there are sufficient funds to made the investment. Similar is the plea and case in this matter also. 5. We, therefore, while respectfully following the decision of a coordinate bench…

Shri Sameer Suneja, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 190/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri K.V.S. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Senior DR
Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…Delhi); CIT Vs. SRF Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 425 (Delhi); Siemens Nixdorf Information Systems GmbH Vs. DDIT (Int'l Taxation) 2(1)(Mum) [2016] 158 ITD 480 (Mumbai-Trib.); Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd (2017) 394 ITR 117 and CIT Vs. Max India Ltd. (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H). 6 ITA No.2581/Del./2016 8. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue contended inter alia that proviso to section 36(1)(iii) is absolute one which starts with the word “shall”; that the assessee has never put to use the asset alleged to have been booked and relied upon the order passed by the ld. CIT (A). 9. When we examine th…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1351/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Amount of Proposed international
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C

…ing by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: 99 • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS. DCIT: 394 ITR 449(SC) • Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.: ITA No. 506 of 2017 dated 31.07.2017 (Guj) • CIT v. Max India Ltd.: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) • CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd.:[2013] 215 Taxman 272 (Gujarat) • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340, • CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) • Lubi Submeribles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj) • CIT vs. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt Ltd: ITA No. 1260 of 2009\ • Gujarat State Fertilizers and C…

The Sonepat Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Haryana vs. ACIT, Haryana

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3023/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N.K.Bansal, Sr.DR
Section 14A

…he presence of excess of owned funds that investments have been made not out of borrowed 4 funds, but out of owned funds. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd reported in (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P & H) wherein it had been held that if interest free funds were available, presumption would arise that investment would be out of the interest free funds generated or available with the company if the interest free funds were sufficient to made the investments. Reliance was also placed another judgment of the Hon’ble Punjab reported in (201…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 467/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No. 467/Del/2014 (A.Y 2009-10)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…CIT : 394 ITR 449 (SC) • • HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 366 ITR 505 (Bom) HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 383 ITR 529 (Bom) • • CIT v. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt. Ltd: ITA No. 1260 of 2009 (Bom.) • Bright enterprises Pvt Ltd. v. CIT: 381 ITR 107 (P&H) • CIT v. Max India Ltd: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) 60 • Gurdas Garg v. CIT: ITA No.413 of 2014 (P&H) • CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. : 383 ITR 490 (Kar.) • PCIT v. Sintex Industries Ltd. : TA No.268 of 2017/82 taxmann.com 171 (Guj.) Lubi Submersibles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj.) • • CIT v. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd.: 352 ITR 583 (Guj) Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd: Tax Appeal…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Acrylics Limited, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 743/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…stment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumstances. Reliance in this respect can be placed upon the decisions of CIT Vs. Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81(P&H) and CIT Vs. Kapson Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (P&H), wherein, it has been held by the higher Courts that if the assessee has availability of own sufficient funds to make the investment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumst…

DCIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Vardhman Acrylics Limited, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 517/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…stment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumstances. Reliance in this respect can be placed upon the decisions of CIT Vs. Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81(P&H) and CIT Vs. Kapson Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (P&H), wherein, it has been held by the higher Courts that if the assessee has availability of own sufficient funds to make the investment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumst…

Vardhman Acrylics Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 482/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…stment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumstances. Reliance in this respect can be placed upon the decisions of CIT Vs. Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81(P&H) and CIT Vs. Kapson Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (P&H), wherein, it has been held by the higher Courts that if the assessee has availability of own sufficient funds to make the investment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumst…

Vardhman Acrylics Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed and that of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 481/CHANDI/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Sh. Vineet Jain (on 13.12.2017)For Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR (on 13.12.2017)
Section 14ASection 25

…stment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumstances. Reliance in this respect can be placed upon the decisions of CIT Vs. Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81(P&H) and CIT Vs. Kapson Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (P&H), wherein, it has been held by the higher Courts that if the assessee has availability of own sufficient funds to make the investment, then the presumption would be that investment has been made from own funds and no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act would be attracted under those circumst…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-11, New Delhi

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…14A of the Act, where the assessee had sufficient surplus funds and there was investments:  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. VS DCIT 394 ITR 449(SC)  Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.: ITA No. 506 of 2017 dated 31/7/2017(Guj)  CIT v. Max India Ltd.: 388 ITR 81 (P&H)  CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd.:[2013J 215 Taxman 272 (Gujarat) CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340.  CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom)  Lubi Submeribles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj)  CIT vs. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt. Ltd: ITA No.1260 of 2009/  Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemica…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…inding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. VS DCIT 394 ITR 449(SC) 82 • Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.: ITA No. 506 of 2017 dated 31/7/2017(Guj) • CIT v. Max India Ltd.: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) • CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd.:[2013J 215 Taxman 272 (Gujarat) CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340. • CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) • Lubi Submeribles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj) • CIT vs. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt. Ltd: ITA No.1260 of 2009/ • Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemica…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…td. v. DCIT : 394 ITR 449 (SC), HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 366 ITR 505 (Bom), HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 383 ITR 529 (Bom), CIT v. K. Raheja Corporation Pvt. Ltd: ITA No.1260 of 2009 (Bom.), Bright enterprises Pvt Ltd. v. CIT: 381 ITR 107 (P&H), CIT v. Max India Ltd: 388 ITR 81 (P&H), Gurdas Garg v. CIT: ITA No.413 of 2014 (P&H), CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. : 383 ITR 490 (Kar.), Lubi Submersibles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj.), CIT v. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd.: 352 ITR 583 (Guj), Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd: Tax Appeal No. 82 of 2013 (Guj HC), CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.: 363 ITR 474 (Guj), CIT vs. Suzlon E…