CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.

410 ITR 466Supreme Court of India2019#137 most cited

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.

501

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. · 410 ITR 466 · section 36(1)(iii) · section 14A · interest free advances · disallowance of interest expenditure · mixed funds presumption · interest free funds · commercial expediency · disallowance for exempt income

Also reported as

102 Taxmann.com 52307 CTR 121261 Taxmann 165175 DTR 1

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 1961Section 40(a)(ia)Section 1962Section 143(2)Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancessection 36(1)(iii)disallowance of interest expenditureweighted deductionsection 35(2ab)commercial expediencysection 14a(2)disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14abusiness expediencyput to usesection 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.

M/S. Rajkamal Builders Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT., Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 417/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 417/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Rajkamal Builders The D.C.I.T. बनाम/ Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 3(1)(2), Vs. Ahmedabad 54, Park Hill Society, Opp: Karnavati Club Nr. Heaven Park, Ramdevnagar, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr0326A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Mehul K. Patel, Advocate अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, Cit. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of 13/07/2022 Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of 10/10/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 20.12.2017 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 9, Ahmedabad Arising Out Of The Order Dated 17.10.2016 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As To ‘The Act’) For Assessment Year 2014-15, Whereby & Whereunder Mainly The Claim Under Section 80Ia(4) Of The Act Made By The

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)Section 80Section 80I

…siness purpose so as to deny interest expenditure. The impugned disallowance is merely on some assumption that it is diversion of interest bearing funds without any basis or justification. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd., 410 ITR 466 held that where interest free funds available with the assessee were sufficient to meet its investment and it could be presumed that the investments were made from the interest free funds available with assessee, therefore, there is no reason to deny the claim of the assessee. Hence, we delete the impugned disallowance of interest expenditure and…

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 299/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 298 & 299/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 cuke Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. ACIT/DCIT, Ltd., Vs. Circle-2, 41, Sanjay Marg, Hathroi Fort, Jaipur. Jaipur-302001. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACG8756G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahend…

Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt Ltd, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 298/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya ( Adv.) &For Respondent: Ms. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)a
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 251(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 298 & 299/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 cuke Geetanjali Hotels & Promoters Pvt. ACIT/DCIT, Ltd., Vs. Circle-2, 41, Sanjay Marg, Hathroi Fort, Jaipur. Jaipur-302001. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACG8756G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahend…

Geojit Financial Services Ltd9Formerly Geojit Bnp Paribas Financial Serviced Ltd), Kochi vs. The ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 376/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vivek, CA
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 374 to 376/Coch/2020 Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 M/s. Geojit Financial Services Ltd., (Formerly Geojit BNP The Assistant Paribas Financial Commissioner of Services Ltd.) Income Tax, 34/659-P, Civil Line Circle 1 (2), Road, Vs. Kochi. Padivattom, Kochi – 682 024. PAN: AABCG1935E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Vivek, CA : Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr Revenue by AR Date of Hearing : 14-09-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14-09-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI,…

Geojit Financial Services Ltd(Formerly Geojit Bnp Paribas Financial Services Ltd, Kochi vs. The ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 375/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vivek, CA
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 374 to 376/Coch/2020 Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 M/s. Geojit Financial Services Ltd., (Formerly Geojit BNP The Assistant Paribas Financial Commissioner of Services Ltd.) Income Tax, 34/659-P, Civil Line Circle 1 (2), Road, Vs. Kochi. Padivattom, Kochi – 682 024. PAN: AABCG1935E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Vivek, CA : Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr Revenue by AR Date of Hearing : 14-09-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14-09-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI,…

Geojit Financial Services Ltd( Formerly Geojit Bnp Paribas Financial Services Ltd), Kochi vs. The ACIT, Kochi

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

ITA 374/COCH/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Vivek, CA
Section 14ASection 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN BEFORE SHRI. CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 374 to 376/Coch/2020 Assessment Year : 2007-08 to 2009-10 M/s. Geojit Financial Services Ltd., (Formerly Geojit BNP The Assistant Paribas Financial Commissioner of Services Ltd.) Income Tax, 34/659-P, Civil Line Circle 1 (2), Road, Vs. Kochi. Padivattom, Kochi – 682 024. PAN: AABCG1935E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Vivek, CA : Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr Revenue by AR Date of Hearing : 14-09-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14-09-2022 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI,…

Ananya Finance for Inclusive Growth Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 959/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Mahavir Prasadassessment Year : 2011-12 Ananya Finance For Inclusive The Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Growth P Ltd. Ambawadi 401, Shaan, Op: M.J. Library Ahmedabad 380015. Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. Pan : Aahca 8023 D

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)

…amount of investment made. He contended that it is settled law that where the assessee had sufficient interest free funds, the disallowance under section 14A was unwarranted. Reliance was placed on the following case laws: > CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. - 410 ITR 466 (SC) > CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. - 363 ITR 474 (Guj.) > CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. - 354 ITR 630 (Guj) > CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. - 352 ITR 583 (Guj) > CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. - 313 ITR 340 (Bom) > Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT - 298 ITR 298 (SC) 28 The ld.counsel for the assessee, accordingly contended that no d…

Sanjay Amlokchand Muthiyan, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Nashik

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 120/PUN/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Pune24 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.120/Pun/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Section 14ASection 263

…onclusion, the Hon’ble High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 627 (SC). More recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT(LTU) VS. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) has reiterated the same view. 6. When we examine the amount of Investments at Rs.8.43 crore as against the availability of assessee’s share capital at Rs.17.37 crore, it becomes evident that the amount of such Investments is much less than the amount of assessee’s own capital. In such circumstances, it has to be inferred that the fresh…

M/S Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed for

ITA 1162/CHANDI/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…381 ITR 107(PB) b. DCIT Vs. Rice Auto Industries.ita No. 800/Chandi/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 c. CIT Vs. Kapsons Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (Pb) d. CIT Vs. Max India (2016) 388 ITR 81 (Pb) e. CIT Vs. Max India LTD. 398 ITR 209 (Pb) f. CIT Vs. Reliance Ind. Ltd 410 ITR 466 (SC) 4.2 With respect to ground No.3 in assessment year 2012-13, it was submitted that this ground challenges the disallowance of interest of Rs. 41,96,383/- pertaining to Cash Credit account for purchase of fixed assets. Similarly, in A.Y. 2013-12, ground No. 2 challenges 5 1161 & 1162-c-2019- M/s Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd, Ludhiana disallowanc…

M/S Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed for

ITA 1161/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Sh. Navdeep Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…381 ITR 107(PB) b. DCIT Vs. Rice Auto Industries.ita No. 800/Chandi/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 c. CIT Vs. Kapsons Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (Pb) d. CIT Vs. Max India (2016) 388 ITR 81 (Pb) e. CIT Vs. Max India LTD. 398 ITR 209 (Pb) f. CIT Vs. Reliance Ind. Ltd 410 ITR 466 (SC) 4.2 With respect to ground No.3 in assessment year 2012-13, it was submitted that this ground challenges the disallowance of interest of Rs. 41,96,383/- pertaining to Cash Credit account for purchase of fixed assets. Similarly, in A.Y. 2013-12, ground No. 2 challenges 5 1161 & 1162-c-2019- M/s Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd, Ludhiana disallowanc…

JCIT (OSD), Circle 14, Pune vs. Kumar Builder Mumbai Realty Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 22/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…bearing funds were diverted for non-business purposes is warranted, as the own funds are more than the loans and advances made to the sister concern placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC). 11. As regards, the disallowance under the provisions of section 14A, ld. AR submits that it is a settled position of law that in the absence of any exempt income, resort to the provisions of section 14A cannot be made. This is purely a legal issue requiring no verification of facts and, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) rightly allowed the claim o…

JCIT (OSD), Circle 14, Pune vs. Kumar Urban Development Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 21/PUN/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…bearing funds were diverted for non-business purposes is warranted, as the own funds are more than the loans and advances made to the sister concern placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC). 11. As regards, the disallowance under the provisions of section 14A, ld. AR submits that it is a settled position of law that in the absence of any exempt income, resort to the provisions of section 14A cannot be made. This is purely a legal issue requiring no verification of facts and, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) rightly allowed the claim o…

JCIT (OSD), Circle 14, Pune vs. Kumar Urban Development Private Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 20/PUN/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar &
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43B

…bearing funds were diverted for non-business purposes is warranted, as the own funds are more than the loans and advances made to the sister concern placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC). 11. As regards, the disallowance under the provisions of section 14A, ld. AR submits that it is a settled position of law that in the absence of any exempt income, resort to the provisions of section 14A cannot be made. This is purely a legal issue requiring no verification of facts and, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) rightly allowed the claim o…

India Infrastructure and Logistics India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3134/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalindia Infrastructure & Vs. The Acit-6(1) Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. [Now Assessed With Acit-15(2)(1)] Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Techno Campus, Road, Mumbai – 400 020 5Th Floor, Lodha Supremus Iii Building, Kanjur Marg East Mumbai – 400 042 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aabci4652G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Aarti Visanj &For Respondent: Shreekala Pardeshi
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ITA No.3134/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2009-10 1 India Infrastructure and Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER India Infrastructure and Vs. The ACIT-6(1) Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. [now assessed with ACIT-15(2)(1)] Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Techno Campus, Road, Mumbai – 400 020 5th Floor, Lodha Supremus III Building, Kanjur Marg East Mumbai – 400 042 स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AABCI4652G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Aarti Visanj & Ajit Shah Respondent by : Shreekala Pardeshi…

M/S. Onmobile Global Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 5(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2560/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos.139 & 2560/Bang/2019 Assessment years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Onmobile Global Ltd., Vs. The Asstt./Deputy Tower # 1, 94/1C & 94/2, Commissioner of Income Tax, Veerasandra Village, Attibele Hobli, Circle 5(1)(2), Anekal Taluk, Electronics City, Bengaluru. Phase 1, Bengaluru – 560 100. PAN: AAACO 3900E ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.07.20…

M/S Onmobile Global Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, both these appeals are partly allowed

ITA 139/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri T. Suryanarayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 244ASection 32

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Ms. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A Nos.139 & 2560/Bang/2019 Assessment years : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Onmobile Global Ltd., Vs. The Asstt./Deputy Tower # 1, 94/1C & 94/2, Commissioner of Income Tax, Veerasandra Village, Attibele Hobli, Circle 5(1)(2), Anekal Taluk, Electronics City, Bengaluru. Phase 1, Bengaluru – 560 100. PAN: AAACO 3900E ASSESSEE RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri T. Suryanarayana, Advocate Respondent by : Dr. Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 27.07.20…

Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Kota

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

ITA 620/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…NSTITUTE VS JCIT, RANGE-2, KOTA Considering these facts, the Tribunal found that the position is not different from the prior asst. year 2002-03.” The above decision stands affirmed by Hon`ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) / (2019) 175 DTR 1 (SC) 6.2 The case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. (Supra) squarely fits in the case of the assesse. The profit of Rs.53.02 Crores (before depreciation and Rs.50.76 Cr. after depreciation) is much bigger than the incremental amount incurred on construction/purchase during the year which is merely Rs.17.06 Crores. The pro…

Allen Career Institute, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Kota

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

ITA 246/JPR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Aug 2022AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 244ASection 36(1)(iii)

…idiaries as on 31st March, 2003. Considering these facts, the Tribunal found that the position is not different from the prior asst. year 2002-03.” The above decision stands affirmed by Hon`ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) / (2019) 175 DTR 1 (SC) 4.2 The case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. (Supra) squarely fits in the case of the assesse. The profit of Rs.53.02 Crores (before depreciation and Rs.50.76 Cr. after depreciation) is much bigger than the incremental amount incurred on construction/purchase during the year which is merely Rs.17.06 Crores. The pro…

Addl . CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2662/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…interest-free funds available with it to the tune of Rs. 136.49 crores. The interest-free loan granted by the assessee to M/s Gaursons India Ltd. was only Rs. 52.36 crores. In Commissioner of Income Tax (Large Taxpayer Unit) v Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 466 (SC), the Supreme Court upheld the view of the Tribunal that where the interest-free fund is available to the assessee which is sufficient to meet its investment, it can be presumed that investments were made from interest-free funds available with the assessee. Similarly, this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v DD industries [2015] 57 taxmann…

Alkyl Amines Chemicals Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (OSD) 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1019/MUM/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Blem/S. Alkyl Amines Chemicals Ld., V. Dcit (Osd)-10(3) 401-407, Nirman Vyapar Kendra Room No. 517, 4Th Floor Plot No. 10, Sector – 17 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400703 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaaca6783F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Shruti Agarwal Department By : Shri Mehul Jain

For Appellant: Ms. Shruti AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 195Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Alkyl Amines Chemicals Ld., v. DCIT (OSD)-10(3) 401-407, Nirman Vyapar Kendra Room No. 517, 4th Floor Plot No. 10, Sector – 17 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vashi, Navi Mumbai – 400703 Mumbai - 400020 PAN: AAACA6783F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Shruti Agarwal Department by : Shri Mehul Jain Date of Hearing : 07.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.07.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee ag…