How many judgments cite CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.?

175 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. (383 ITR 490), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 35(2AB), Section 115JB, Section 144C(3), Section 37(1).

CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.

383 ITR 490High Court2016#553 most cited

What is CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee possesses interest-free funds exceeding investments in tax-free securities, it is presumed that investments are made from these own funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii). Additionally, weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is computed on the gross expenditure incurred, not net expenditure after reducing income earned.

175

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. · Section 14A · Rule 8D(2)(ii) · disallowance of interest expenditure · interest-free funds · investments in tax-free securities · own funds presumption · Section 35(2AB) · weighted deduction R&D · gross expenditure deduction

Also reported as

79 Taxmann.com 365

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 143(3)Section 35(2AB)Section 115JB Section 144C(3)Section 37(1)Section 8D Section 10(34)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 8d(2)(ii)section 14(2)r&d expenditure section 92(1)disallowance of interest expenditure section 14a(1)section 92b(1)section 115jb(2)corporate guarantee weighted deduction section 35(2ab)legal expenses

Judgments citing CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.

Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is allowed in part

ITA 53/AHD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Parin Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratnam, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 35

…harmaceutical Ltd.) A.Y. 2010-11 made by the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings which was not allowed by the AO and which was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. A.R. placed reliance on the decision of Bosch Ltd. 167 ITD 650 and Mircolabs Ltd. 383 ITR 490 (Kar) in respect of this claim. He further submitted that similar ground was involved in assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10 which was allowed by the Ld. ITAT. 5.2 The ld. CIT-D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). 5.3 We have carefully considered the rival submissions. The ld. CIT(A) has given the finding in respect of this c…

DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Navin Fluorine International Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed partly for statisti...

ITA 9/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Ms. Arati VissanjiFor Respondent: 30/05/2024

Section 14A

…ed and not the net expenditure after reducing income earned The appellant has cited the case of CIT vs. reducing income earned The appellant has cited the case of CIT vs. reducing income earned The appellant has cited the case of CIT vs. Micro Lab Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Kar) to support his contentions. Micro Lab Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Kar) to support his contentions. Micro Lab Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Kar) to support his contentions. Since, the legal issue on similar facts has been decided by higher Since, the legal issue on similar facts has been decided by higher Since, the legal issue on similar facts has…

Agarwal Industries Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 812/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 37Section 37(1)

…ITA 812 Agarwal Industries P Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Vice-President AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.812/Hyd/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15) Agarwal Industries (P) Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward –1 (2) PAN:AACCA0094R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue by: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CA सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 19/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 95/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.95/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &

Section 14A

…dividend received. 2.5 The Appellant relies on the following among other decisions further submission that no disallowance can we made under rule 8D(2)(ii) in view of the availability of sufficient own funds for making the investments. CIT vs. Microlabs Ltd -383 ITR 490 Kar. PCIT v Sintex Industries - 403 ITR 418 Guj confirmed by 93 Taxman.com 24 SC. CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd - 307 CTR 121 SC. 2.6 The CIT(A) / NFAC ought to have directed that disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) should be made only in respect of investments from which Dividend has actually been earned during the year. The…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Chennai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 84/CHNY/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.84/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35Section 35(3)Section 43B

…rule 8D(2)(ii). 2.3 The Appellant and relies on the following among other decisions further submission that no disallowance can we made under rule 8D(2)(ii) in view of the availability of sufficient own funds for making the investments. CIT vs. Microlabs Ltd -383 ITR 490 Kar. PCIT v Sintex Industries - 403 ITR 418 Guj confirmed by 93 Taxman.com 24 SC. CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd - 307 CTR 121 SC. 3.1 The CIT(A) / NFAC erred in confirming the interest disallowance of Rs.8,95,30,266/- as being interest on borrowings relatable to interestingly advances given to group companies. 3.2 The CIT(A) /NFAC ought t…

Fatehpuria Transformers and Witchgears Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

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

ITA 387/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjeev Kumar MathurFor Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 801ASection 801A(5)Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.387/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 cuke Fatehpuria Transformers and DCIT, Vs. Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1, P. O. Machwa P. O. Machwa Jaipur Kalwar Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACF 3456 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Sh. Sanjeev Ku…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl Ciat 2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 120/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 43BSection 80

…s available with assessee. In such situation Section 14A of the Act would not be applicable. Similar views have been expressed by other High Courts in CIT Vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj)/ 2013 SCC Online Guj 8613, CIT Vs. Microlabs Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Karn)/ 2016 SCC Online Kar 8490 and CIT Vs. Max India Ltd. (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P & H) / 2016 SCC Online P&H 6788 Mr. S Ganesh the learned Senior Counsel while citing these cases from the High Courts have further pointed out that those judgments have attained finality. On reading of these judgments, we are of the considered opinion that the High C…

M/S. Manipal Education and Medical Group India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-4(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 105/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR), Bengaluru

Section 10(34)Section 144ASection 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 92

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2015-16 M/s. Manipal Education and Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Medical Group India Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, 24/1, 15th Floor, JW Marriot, Circle 4(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. PAN : AADCM 8103A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate Ms. Bhoomija Verma, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 16.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29.08.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sah…

Dcdc Health Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-7(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 9525/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41

…. reported in 403 ITR 418 (Guj) Revenue's SLP was dismissed [255 Taxman171 (SC) ] • South Indian Bank Ltd Vs CIT. reported in 438 ITR 1 (SC) 130 taxmann.com 178(SC) • CIT VS Suzlon Energy Ltd. reported in 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) • CIT Vs Microlabs Ltd. reported in 383 ITR 490 (Kar) • CIT Vs Max India Ltd. reported in 388 ITR 81 (P&H)” 9. Further it is found from the record that for the Financial Year 2015-16 the total amount of interest paid/payable on cash credit facility and other was Rs. 19,81,563/- and total amount of interest income earned by the assessee in the form of interest on loans bank deposits and ot…

ACIT, Circle-14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3224/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singh: A.Y : 2015-16 Acit, Circle – 14(1(2), Vs. M/S. Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai. (Appellant) Centaure House, Shanti Nagar Vakola, Santacruz East Mumbai 400055 (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vishwas Mahendale, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Bagchi, Sr. A.R

Section 143(3)Section 35

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : A.Y : 2015-16 ACIT, Circle – 14(1(2), Vs. M/s. Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai. (Appellant) Centaure House, Shanti Nagar Vakola, Santacruz East Mumbai 400055 (Respondent) CO No. 25/MUM/2023 : A.Y : 2015-16 M/s. Centaur Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Circle – 14(1(2), Centaure House, Shanti Nagar Mumbai. (Appellant) Vakola, Santacruz East, Mumbai 400055 PAN : AAACC0444K (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vishwas Mahendale, Advocate Respondent by :…

Bsl Ltd., Rajasthan vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 31, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6612/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Usbsl Ltd., Vs. Dcit 26, Industrial Area, Central Circle-31, Post Box No. 17, New Delhi. Gandhi Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan-311 001 Pan No. Aabcb0639G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Revenue By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.05.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.08.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Kolkata Relating To Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Assessee Is The Company Stated To Be Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Synthetic/Wollen/Worsted Yarn Fabrics & Synthetics Fabrics, Manufacturing & Trading Of Ready-Made Garments, Generation Of Power, Processing Of Synthetics Etc. Assessee Electronically Filed Its Return Of Income Bsl Ltd. Vs. Dcit 2

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 801Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER BSL Ltd., Vs. DCIT 26, Industrial Area, Central Circle-31, Post Box No. 17, New Delhi. Gandhi Nagar, Bhilwara, Rajasthan-311 001 PAN No. AABCB0639G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Revenue by Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 03.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 12.05.2023 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.08.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, K…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Sterling Agro Industries Ltd

The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA - 105 / 2023HC Delhi20 Feb 2023

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 80I

…NEUTRAL CITATION NO : 2023:DHC:2330-DB ITA No.105/2023 Page 1 of 10 $~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 20.02.2023 + ITA 105/2023 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 ..... Appellant Through: Mr Puneet Rai, Sr Standing Counsel with Mr Ashwini Kumar, Standing Counsel. versus M/S STERLING AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER HON'BLE MS. JUSTI…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 659/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

…gard may be upheld. The ld. DR relied on the order of the AO. 16. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We notice that the similar issue was considered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Micro Labs Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490, where it was held that no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for. The relevant extract of the observations made by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above said case is as below - “40. We have heard the rival submissions. A copy of the availability of funds and investments made was filed before us which is at pages 38 to 42 of…

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 658/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 657/COCH/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 656/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Cochin Shipyard Ltd, Kochi

In the result, all the appeals by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 655/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. ARFor Respondent: S/Shri Rajasekharan & K. Gopi, CAs

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 32(1)(iia)Section 40

Dhnalaxmi Bank Limited, Trichur vs. The Pr CIT, Thrissur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 56/COCH/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy S.Assessment Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnanunny, CAFor Respondent: Smt. M. Rajasekhar, CIT(DR)

Section 10(33)Section 14Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 263

…free funds available are much more than the investments made and therefore we Page 7 of 10 see merit in the argument of the ld. AR. We notice that the similar issue was considered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Micro Labs Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490, where it was held that no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for. The relevant extract of the observations made by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above said case is as below “40. We have heard the rival submissions. A copy of the availability of funds and investments made was filed before us which is at pages 38 to 42 of th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore vs. Century Real Estate Holdings Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 740/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar, D.R

…ble with the assessee was Rs.355.57 crores while the value of investment in partnership firm mutual funds and shares aggregated to Rs.251.82 crores. In view of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Micro Labs Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 490, no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for. For the sake of convenience, we extract below the observations made by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above said case. ITA No.580 & 740/Bang/2022 M/s. Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 24 of 29 “40. We have heard the rival submissions. A copy of the availabili…

Vaishnavi Infrastructure Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 728/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…re made out of borrowed funds or personal funds. If personal funds, the issue of disallowance should have been adjudicated in the light of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT 298 ITR 298(SC) and CIT v. Microlabs Ltd., 383 ITR 490 (Kar.) Therefore, we are of the view that the issue requires proper verification and examination by the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) in this regard and restore the issue to the file of Assessing Officer to readjudicate the issue in the light of relevant provisions of the Act afresh, after affording opportunity of be…