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 367,154 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.

DCIT, Chennai vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 880/CHNY/2017[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 879/CHNY/2017[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

Malladi Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1259/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

Malladi Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1258/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

Malladi Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1257/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1256/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1255/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1254/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Dec 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 879, 880, 881, 882, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Malladi Drugs & Tax, V. Pharmaceuticals Limited, Corporate Circle -4(1), No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Chennai. St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos: 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 Malladi Drugs & Pharmaceuticals V. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Limited, Tax, No. 9, G.S.T. Road, Corporate Circle -4(1), St. Thomas Mount, Chennai. Chennai – 600 016. [Pan:Aaacm 5031A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate Assessee By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per G. Manjunatha:

For Appellant: Shri. AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 28Section 37(1)

…. In this regard, relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godhra Electric Supplu Co Ltd vs CIT 225 ITR 746 (SC). The assessee has also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd 307 CTR 121 (SC), CIT vs Hotel Savera 229 ITR 795 (Mad) and S.A. Builders Vs CIT(A) 288 ITR 1(SC). 33. The Ld. DR, on the other hand supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessee has not made any :-25-: ITA. No: 879, 880, 881 & 882/Chny/2017 1254, 1255, 1256, 1257, 1258 & 1259/Chny/2017 reasons for not charging interest on loans given…

Krishna Mohan P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-5, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2973/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Hiren Mehta, C.A. Revenue By Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.12.2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 09.03.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Relevant Facts As Culled From The Material On Records Are As Under :

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri Hiren Mehta, C.A. Revenue by Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 06.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement: 08.12.2021 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.03.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The relevant facts as culled from the material on records are as under : 3…

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

…sumed that only interest free funds have been utilized for making investments during the year. Reference, in this regard, is made to the following decisions: i. East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT: 224 ITR 627 (SC) ii. CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.: 410 ITR 466 (SC) iii. CIT v. UTI Bank Ltd.: 215 Taxman 8 - The Supreme Court dismissed the revenue‟s SLP in Civil Appeal No. 468/2014 iv. Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT: 134 ITR 219 (Cal.) v. PCIT v. Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd.: ITA No. 205 of 2018 (Del HC) vi. PCIT v. Reebok India Company: [2018] 259 Taxman 100 (Delhi) vii. Indian Explosives Ltd. V. CIT: 1…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Shalivahana Green Energy Limited, Secunderabad

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

ITA 1120/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri S. Srinivas
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member AND Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Shalivahana Green Energy Income Tax, Limited, Circle 3(1), 7th Floor, Minerva Complex, Hyderabad. SD Road, Secunderabad. Telangana. PAN : AALCS2217B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S.Rama Rao. Revenue by: Shri S. Srinivas. Date of hearing: 06.09.2021 Date of pronouncement: 24.11.2021 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, A.M. This appeal is filed by the Revenue…

Mica Industries Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals are dismissed in regard to the first question

ITA 3467/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Nov 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri C. S. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. D. R
Section 143

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 3467/Del/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/s. MICA Industries Ltd., DCIT, A–36, 2nd Floor, Rajouri Garden, Vs. Circle -16 (2), New Delhi – 110 027. New Delhi. PAN: AAECM2486K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri C. S. Anand, Advocate; Department by : Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. D. R.; Date of Hearing : 21/10/2021 Date of pronouncement : 22/11/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the as…

Vardhman Acrylics Ltd., Ludhiana vs. DCIT, C-1, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 714/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Nov 2021AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Gupta, CIT(A) &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)Section 8D(2)(iii)

…be demonstrated from the record. These facts are not coming out from any of the orders, consequently the finding that these are old funds of the assessee and thus was sufficient to meet the investment as considered in CIT Vs Reliance Industries Ltd. (2010) 410 ITR 466 (S.C) cannot be readily applied. Accordingly, the ld. AR was required to address his arguments on these issues from the record. 5. Mr. Gupta in reply submitted that these facts may be verified and he has no objection if the issue is restored back to AO. 6. The ld. Sr.DR relied upon the impugned order. No distinguishing argument was referred…

Rattanindia Power Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3295/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. S. Anant, Sr. D. R
Section 115JSection 14Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Through Video Conferencing) ITA. No. 3295/Del/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/s. Rattan India Power Ltd. DCIT, [Formerly known as Indiabulls Vs. Power Ltd.] Circle : 3 (3), M–62 & 63, First Floor, Mumbai. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. PAN: AALCS2063D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Advocate; Department by: Shri B. S. Anant, Sr. D. R.; Date of Hearing : 17/11/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 17/11/2021 O R D E R PER PRASHANT M…

Bharti Infratel Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 425/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Advocate; &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati [CIT] – DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 2Section 37Section 37(1)

…is available in favour of the assessee that such funds are advanced out of own funds and no disallowance can be made under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. He referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466. Even otherwise explaining the facts of the case he submitted that advances are made out of commercial expediency and, therefore, no disallowance could have been made. He relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S. A. Builders Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC). 13. Coming to ground No.3 with respect to the adjustment of provision of…

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)

…antiate 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 the rival submissions of the parties and perused…

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)

…antiate 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 the rival submissions of the parties and perused…

M/S. Brigade Enterprises Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(3), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 2364/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Brigade Enterprises Ltd., 26/1, 30Th Floor Wtc, The Dy. Commissioner Of Dr. Rajkumar Road, Income-Tax, Malleshwaram, Circle-2(3), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Vs. Bengaluru-560 100. Pan – Aaacb 7459 F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri P.C Kincha, C.A Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20-07-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 11-10-2021 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30/08/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-11, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2013-14 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. General Ground 1.1. The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["Cit(A) For Short Hereinafter"] To The Extent Prejudicial To The Appellant Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. 2. Disallowance Under Section 14A R.W. Rule 8D 2.1. The Learned Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle - 2(3), Bangalore ["Ao" For Short Hereinafter] Has Erred In Making A Disallowance Of Rs. 2,02,22,837/- Under Se Tion 14A Comprising Of Disallowa,,Ø-1S. 1,73,98,969/- Under Rule 8D(2)(Ii) & Rs. 28,23,868/- Under Rule 8D(2)(Iii) & The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Said Disallowance.

For Appellant: Shri P.C Kincha, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 14ASection 35DSection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s. Brigade Enterprises Ltd., 26/1, 30th Floor WTC, The Dy. Commissioner of Dr. Rajkumar Road, Income-tax, Malleshwaram, Circle-2(3), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Vs. Bengaluru-560 100. PAN – AAACB 7459 F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri P.C Kincha, C.A Revenue by : Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 20-07-2021 Date of Pronouncement : 11-10-2021 ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee agai…

M/S Jaico Automobile Engineering Company Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-11(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 933/BANG/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 2(47)(v)Section 234ASection 45Section 53A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2007-08 M/s. Jaico Automobile Engineering Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Company Pvt. Ltd., of Income Tax, 9/10, II Stage, D.K. Industrial Area, Circle 11(5), Mahadevapura, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 048. PAN: AAACJ 5640E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 08.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 11.10.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari, Accountan…

Edelcap Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue as well as the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6889/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2021AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 143(3)

…tment of Rs.72.12 Crores. Hence, by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd., reported in 383 ITR 529 and the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466, he pleaded that the investment made to the extent of availability of own funds should not be considered for the purpose of disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. Accordingly, he pleaded that the interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules should be made only for the remaining investments of Rs.4.23 Crores (Rs. 72.12 Crores – Rs.67.89 Crore…