What is CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. authority for?

When mixed funds are available, interest-free advances are presumed to be made from the assessee's own interest-free funds, preventing disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii). This principle also applies to section 14A disallowance, where interest expenditure is not disallowed if surplus funds are available and no direct nexus is established with borrowed funds for investments earning exempt income.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.?

501 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466), spanning 2016 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 36(1)(iii), Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 1961, Section 40(a)(ia), Section 1962.

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466)

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

…ation. The above view of ours has been fortified by the following judicial pronouncements:- Page 6 of 10 DCDC Health Services Private Limited vs. ITO • “Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. reported in 394 ITR 449 (SC) • CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) • PCIT Vs. Sintex Industries Ltd. 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…

M/S Manali Petrochemicals Limited, Guindy, Chennai vs. DCIT, Large Taxpayer Unit-1, Chennai

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

ITA 369/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 369/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2016-17 Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., The Dcit, Spic House, 88, V. Large Taxpayer Unit-1, Mount Road, Chennai Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. Pan: Aaacm 3404D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05.07.2023

For Appellant: Shri Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…g borrowed funds, then presumption is drawn in favour of the assessee that investments made in shares and securities is out of own funds. This principle is supported by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., 307 CTR 121 (SC) . The Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utility Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) has taken a similar view. In this case, it was claim of assessee that it has sufficient own funds, which is in excess of investments made in shares and securities, which yield exempt income. If the assessee is able to establish availability of su…

JCIT(OSD), Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Snowtex Investment Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 236/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.236/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Jcit(Osd), Circle-11, Kolkata.....................................................……Appellant Vs. M/S Snowtex Investment Ltd.........................……........……...…..…..Respondent South West Block, 4Th Floor, Viswakarma Building, 86C, Topsia Road, Topsia, Kolkata-700046. [Pan: Aaecs0334C] Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 16, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 09, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 26.10.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Revenue Through Its Grounds Of Appeal Is Relating To The Action Of The Cit(A) In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.1,81,13,622/- Made By The Assessing Officer On Account Of Proportionate Disallowance Of Interest Expenditure In Respect Of Interest Free Loans Given By The Assessee.

Section 250

…interest free funds in the form of trade payables of Rs.37.05 crores. The ld. counsel has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the recent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd. reported in (2019) 410 ITR 466, wherein, the Hon’ble Supreme Court confirmed the proposition of law that if the own funds/interest free funds are available with the assessee to meet the investment, presumption will be that the assessee has used own interest I.T.A No.236/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2013-14 M/s Snowtex Investment Ltd free funds for the said investment. In view o…

Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 343/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.343/PUN/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Vs. DCIT, Circle-7, Subhadra CME Engineers, Pune Plot No.1, Subhadra House, Nanded Phata, Pune 411041 Maharashtra PAN : AAVPG0671L Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Sharad Shah Revenue by Shri Gurmel Singh Date of hearing 08-06-2023 Date of pronouncement 08-06-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 25-01-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Cent…

Shri Kunal Garg, Bathinda vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 12/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 250oSection 263Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.12/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Kunal Garg, 2301, Aggarsain Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Nagar, Amrik Singh Road, Income Tax, Circle-1, Bhupindra Flour Mills Area, Bathinda. Bathinda. [PAN:ALJPG6434E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, & Sh. P. N. Arora & Sh. P.K. Singla, Advs. Respondent by Sh. S. M. Surendra Nath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.05.2023 30.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appea…

ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed

ITA 1538/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 1318/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 M/S. Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited,....Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road (South), Topsia, Kolkata-700046 [Pan: Aaacs1425L] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-11(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- I.T.A. No. 1538/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-11(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- M/S. Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited,.Respondent 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road (South), Topsia, Kolkata-700046 [Pan: Aaacs1425L]

Section 115JSection 45Section 45ISection 45Q

…lained that no borrowed funds were used for the investment and that own funds were used by the assessee for the purpose of investment. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Limited (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the proposition made by the various High Courts that if the assessee is possessed of own/interest-free funds sufficient to make the investment, then, under the circumstances, presumption will be that the investments have been made by the assessee out of own funds/interest-free funds available to…

M/S Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-11(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed

ITA 1318/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 1318/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 M/S. Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited,....Appellant 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road (South), Topsia, Kolkata-700046 [Pan: Aaacs1425L] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-11(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- I.T.A. No. 1538/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,.......Appellant Circle-11(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 -Vs.- M/S. Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited,.Respondent 86C, Vishwakarma, Topsia Road (South), Topsia, Kolkata-700046 [Pan: Aaacs1425L]

Section 115JSection 45Section 45ISection 45Q

…lained that no borrowed funds were used for the investment and that own funds were used by the assessee for the purpose of investment. The issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Limited (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has upheld the proposition made by the various High Courts that if the assessee is possessed of own/interest-free funds sufficient to make the investment, then, under the circumstances, presumption will be that the investments have been made by the assessee out of own funds/interest-free funds available to…

M/S. Rns Infrastructure Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Range- 2(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1171/BANG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar Hegde, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. Suresh Rao, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2014-15 RNS Infrastructure Limited, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 7th Floor, Naveen Complex, of Income Tax, No.14, M.G. Road, Range 2(3), Trinity Circle, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. PAN: AACCR 7165G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Shreesh Kumar Hegde, CA Respondent by : Shri P. Suresh Rao, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 26.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd ( Erstwhile Icici Ltd), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 7589/MUM/2007[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2023AY 2001-2002

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri K.C. Selvamani

Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 88

…008.32 Crores, whereas Investment Earning Exempt Income stood at INR 4559.10 Crores only. She also placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT : 438 ITR 1 (SC) and CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. : 410 ITR 466 (SC). 21. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon paragraph 5 to 5.30 of the Assessment Order and submitted that admittedly, the Assessee common pool of funds which was utilized for business activities including acquisition of shares. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was justified in attributing a portion of the interest expe…

Acme Chem Limited, Kolkata vs. NFAC, Delhi/ D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata

ITA 660/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…s and mutual Page 6 of 67 I.T.A. Nos.: 641, 650 & 660/KOL/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Acme Chem Limited. funds. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 interest disallowance is uncalled for u/s 14A of the Act. As regards under Rule 8D(iii) at the rate of 0.5% of the average investments it was submitted that the same ought to have been computed only on the investments fetching exempt income and for this contention reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cas…

Acme Chem Limited, Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata

ITA 650/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…s and mutual Page 6 of 67 I.T.A. Nos.: 641, 650 & 660/KOL/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Acme Chem Limited. funds. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 interest disallowance is uncalled for u/s 14A of the Act. As regards under Rule 8D(iii) at the rate of 0.5% of the average investments it was submitted that the same ought to have been computed only on the investments fetching exempt income and for this contention reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cas…

Acme Chem Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata

ITA 641/KOL/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…s and mutual Page 6 of 67 I.T.A. Nos.: 641, 650 & 660/KOL/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Acme Chem Limited. funds. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 interest disallowance is uncalled for u/s 14A of the Act. As regards under Rule 8D(iii) at the rate of 0.5% of the average investments it was submitted that the same ought to have been computed only on the investments fetching exempt income and for this contention reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the cas…

Vodafone Essar Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT, Chandigarh

ITA 216/CHANDI/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 216/ चंडी/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07) आअसं. 1173/चांडी /2011 (िन.व. 2007-08) Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Known As ‘ Vodafone Essar Limited’) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan:Aaach-5332-B बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range -1, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Chandigarh. अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Salil Kapoor With S/Shri Vibhu Jain & Ninad Patade ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor with S/Shri Vibhu Jain and Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

Section 115JSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 80I

…t own funds of the assessee comprising of share capital and reserves and surpluses are aggregating to Rs.8632 crores. To support his propostion, the ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., 410 ITR 466 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. , 313 ITR 340 (Bom). 18. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee failed to substantiate business consideration with the subsidiaries to whom loans were advanced. The ld. Departmental Represent…

M/S Vodafone Essar Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT, Chandigarh

ITA 1173/CHANDI/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshआअसं. 216/ चंडी/2011 (िन.व. 2006-07) आअसं. 1173/चांडी /2011 (िन.व. 2007-08) Vodafone India Ltd. (Formerly Known As ‘ Vodafone Essar Limited’) Peninsula Corporate Park, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan:Aaach-5332-B बनाम Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range -1, ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent Chandigarh. अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Salil Kapoor With S/Shri Vibhu Jain & Ninad Patade ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor with S/Shri Vibhu Jain and Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan

Section 115JSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 40Section 80I

…t own funds of the assessee comprising of share capital and reserves and surpluses are aggregating to Rs.8632 crores. To support his propostion, the ld.Counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd., 410 ITR 466 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. , 313 ITR 340 (Bom). 18. Per contra, ld. Departmental Representative vehemently defended the impugned order. The ld. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee failed to substantiate business consideration with the subsidiaries to whom loans were advanced. The ld. Departmental Represent…

M/S Western India Ceramics P. Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. Commr. Income Tax, Cen. Cir.-1, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, ground number 4 of the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 14/RJT/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot03 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R

Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 40

…al. Further, the assessee submitted before us copy of the ledger account of the parties to whom the aforesaid advances were made and it is evident that the said advances were made in the earlier assessment years. In the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that where Assessing Officer rejected assessee's claim under section 36(1)(iii) taking a view that interest would not have been payable to banks if funds were not provided to subsidiaries, in view of fact that interest free funds were available to assessee which were sufficient to meet its investment in subsid…

DCIT(Ltu) - 1, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 3178/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2011-12