CIT v. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court

398 ITR 209High Court2017#2949 most cited

What is CIT v. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court authority for?

No interest disallowance can be made if interest-free funds available are sufficient for interest-free loans and advances.

40

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Max India Ltd · section 36(1)(iii) · interest free funds · interest disallowance · sufficient interest free funds · loans and advances · Punjab High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 10(38)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on non-compete feesection 36(i)(iii)software technology parksection 36(i)business transfer agreementdepreciation on softwaresection 36(l)(iii)interest free advancesnon-compete feesection 43atransferee companyslump sale

Judgments citing CIT v. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court

Tanglin Developments Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 143/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri C Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Jairam Raipura, CIT(DR OSD)
Section 43A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.143 to 146/Bang/2021 Assessment year : 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18 M/s Tanglin Developments Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income- No.23/2, Coffeeday Square, tax, Vittal Mallya Road, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 001. PAN –AABCT 0356 N ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Assesseeby : Shri C Ramesh, C.A Revenue by : Shri Jairam Raipura, CIT(DR OSD) Date of hearing : 30.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 31.01.2022 O R D E R Per Bench These4 appe…

Nahar Poly Films Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1415/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1414 & 1415/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Nahar Poly Films Limited, The Acit, बनाम 376, Industrial Area, Circle 7, Aaykar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacn5708K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 155JSection 36(1)(iii)

…further relied on the following cases to substantiate his contention: - 1. ACIT vs. Janak Global Resources Pvt. Ltd 175 ITD 365 (Chd) 2. Bright Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 381 ITR 107 (Pb.) 3. CIT vs. Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (Pb) 4. CIT vs. Max India 398 ITR 209 (Pb) 5. CIT vs. Reliance India Ltd 410 ITR 466 (SC) 6. Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co Ltd. vs. DCIT 394 ITR 449 (SC) 9. On the other hand, the Ld. DR vehemently supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that there is no legal or factual infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) to interfere with the same. 10. We have heard th…

Nahar Poly Films Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/CHANDI/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1414 & 1415/Chd/2019 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Nahar Poly Films Limited, The Acit, बनाम 376, Industrial Area, Circle 7, Aaykar Bhawan, Ludhiana Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacn5708K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 155JSection 36(1)(iii)

…further relied on the following cases to substantiate his contention: - 1. ACIT vs. Janak Global Resources Pvt. Ltd 175 ITD 365 (Chd) 2. Bright Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 381 ITR 107 (Pb.) 3. CIT vs. Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (Pb) 4. CIT vs. Max India 398 ITR 209 (Pb) 5. CIT vs. Reliance India Ltd 410 ITR 466 (SC) 6. Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co Ltd. vs. DCIT 394 ITR 449 (SC) 9. On the other hand, the Ld. DR vehemently supported the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that there is no legal or factual infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) to interfere with the same. 10. We have heard th…

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)

…) and Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd 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…

Natural Dehydrated Vegetables Pvt.Ltd, Bhavnagar vs. The DCIT, Circle-1, Bhavnagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 822/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri , Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.822/Ahd/2018 { "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Natural Dehydrated Vegetables Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, G-14, Aristo Complex, Vs Circle 1 Vaghawadi Road, Bhavnagar Bhavnagar -364 001 Pan No.Aabcn7900J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Revenue) Appellant By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Bhati, Ar Revenue By : Shri :L.P. Jain, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Bhati, ARFor Respondent: Shri :L.P. Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…cient interest free funds in the form of share capital and reserves and surplus which are more than the alleged loans and advances which was recovered in the year under appeal. Referring to the decisions in the case of CIT vs. Max India ltd. (P & H, HC) (2017)398 ITR 209, Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. dated 09.01.2009 and Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. vide Civil Appeal No.10 of 2019 on 02.01.2019. He contended that the disallowance needs to be deleted. Natural Dehydrated Vegetables For AY 2015-16 7 14. Per contra Ld. Depart…

Unitech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7923/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2019AY 2014-15
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 24Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

M/S. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed and the 2 appeals preferred by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1907/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri K. Narsimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Sh. S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 142Section 2

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

M/S. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed and the 2 appeals preferred by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1906/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri K. Narsimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Sh. S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 142Section 2

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

M/S. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed and the 2 appeals preferred by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1905/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri K. Narsimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Sh. S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 142Section 2

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

ACIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi vs. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed and the 2 appeals preferred by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6437/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri K. Narsimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Sh. S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 142Section 2

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

ACIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi vs. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the assessee are allowed and the 2 appeals preferred by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4781/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri K. Narsimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit TiwariFor Respondent: Sh. S.S.Rana, CIT DR
Section 142Section 2

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Unitech Ltd., New Delhi

In the result this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 311/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary CIT-D.R
Section 144CSection 36(1)(iii)

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

M/S. Unitech Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 6585/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary CIT-D.R
Section 144CSection 36(1)(iii)

…stances, presumption is always in the favour of the assessee that these are advances out of surplus funds only and such presumption has been laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (P&H) High Court, reported in 398 ITR 209. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of this case, we hold that no disallowance can be made. In so far as reliance placed on earlier year orders, Ld. Counsel has brought on record that the revenue’s appeals for the Asstt. Year 2009- 10 and 2010-11 have been dismissed by the Tribunal by quashing the assessments on the ground of limitation. Thu…

M/S Hype Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Mohali vs. DCIT, C-6(1), Mohali

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

ITA 616/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Jaspal Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh, Sr DR
Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…k Depot, ITA No.31 of 2017 dated 23.02.2017 (P&H) 5. Pr.CIT vs. M/s. Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.87 of 2017 dated 24.07.2017 (P&H) 6. Trident Infotech Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr, (2016) 385 ITR 335 (P&H) 7. CIT vs. Max India Ltd., (2017) 398 ITR 209 (P&H) ” “9. We have carefully considered the contentions of both the parties and have also gone through various case laws referred to before us. The issue to be adjudicated, as narrowed down from the arguments made before us by both the parties, is whether in relation to disallowance of interest made u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act, the proposition la…

DCIT, CC-I, Ludhiana vs. M/S Genex Industries Ltd., Ludhiana

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 594/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay SoodFor Respondent: Shri. Ashish Gupta
Section 36

…nt interest free funds were available . business and advances have been given to Genex Polyfab Private Limited out of these funds. The appellant has also placed reliance on the judgement of Honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Max India Ltd 398 ITR 209, in the case of Kapsons 381 ITR 204 and also in the case of Bright Enterprises 381 ITR 107. 4.7 I have carefully considered the material available on record including the judicial citations given Therein and find that disallowance of interest has been made by the AO by looking at the financial statements of the appellant. I find that no opportun…

DCIT, CC-I, Ludhiana vs. M/S Genex Industries Ltd., Ludhiana

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 593/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Oct 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay SoodFor Respondent: Shri. Ashish Gupta
Section 36

…nt interest free funds were available . business and advances have been given to Genex Polyfab Private Limited out of these funds. The appellant has also placed reliance on the judgement of Honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Max India Ltd 398 ITR 209, in the case of Kapsons 381 ITR 204 and also in the case of Bright Enterprises 381 ITR 107. 4.7 I have carefully considered the material available on record including the judicial citations given Therein and find that disallowance of interest has been made by the AO by looking at the financial statements of the appellant. I find that no opportun…

DCIT, CC-I, Ludhiana vs. M/S Genex Industries Ltd., Ludhiana

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 592/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay SoodFor Respondent: Shri. Ashish Gupta
Section 36

…nt interest free funds were available . business and advances have been given to Genex Polyfab Private Limited out of these funds. The appellant has also placed reliance on the judgement of Honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Max India Ltd 398 ITR 209, in the case of Kapsons 381 ITR 204 and also in the case of Bright Enterprises 381 ITR 107. 4.7 I have carefully considered the material available on record including the judicial citations given Therein and find that disallowance of interest has been made by the AO by looking at the financial statements of the appellant. I find that no opportun…

JCIT, Rang-2, Kota vs. Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 575/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 14A

…unjal Sales Corp. vs. CIT & Anr. (2008) 168 Taxman 43 (SC) • Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT 63 taxmann.com 308 (SC) • CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 178 taxman 135 • Hindalco Industries Co. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 430 • CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (2017) 398 ITR 209 48. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The AO’s contention is that the borrowed funds have been used for giving loan and advances to various subsidiaries/group companies. The ld. CIT(A) has returned a finding M/s Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs. ACIT that the assessee company has admitted t…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. JCIT, Kota

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 461/JPR/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Oct 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 14A

…unjal Sales Corp. vs. CIT & Anr. (2008) 168 Taxman 43 (SC) • Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT 63 taxmann.com 308 (SC) • CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 178 taxman 135 • Hindalco Industries Co. CIT (2016) 389 ITR 430 • CIT vs. Max India Ltd. (2017) 398 ITR 209 48. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The AO’s contention is that the borrowed funds have been used for giving loan and advances to various subsidiaries/group companies. The ld. CIT(A) has returned a finding M/s Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. Vs. ACIT that the assessee company has admitted t…

ACIT, Circle, Panchkula vs. M/S Janak Global Resources Pvt. Ltd., Panchkula

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 470/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Oct 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manoj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA
Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…Book Depot, ITA No.31 of 2017 dated 23.02.2017 (P&H) 5. Pr.CIT vs. M/s. Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.87 of 2017 dated 24.07.2017 (P&H) 6. Trident Infotech Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr, (2016) 385 ITR 335 (P&H) 7. CIT vs. Max India Ltd., (2017) 398 ITR 209 (P&H) ” 9. We have carefully considered the contentions of both the parties and have also gone through various case laws referred to before us. The issue to be adjudicated,as narrowed down from the arguments made before us by both the parties, is whether in relation to disallowance of interest made u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act, the proposition la…