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 366,470 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 14A Section 143(3)Section 1961 Section 40(a)(ia)Section 1962 Section 143(2)Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

interest free advances section 36(1)(iii)disallowance of interest expenditure weighted deduction section 35(2ab)commercial expediency section 14a(2)disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a business expediency put to use section 36(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 825/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 795/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 671/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hydeabad, Hyderabad

ITA 636/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 31/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 2132/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

Associated Broadcasting Co. Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1752/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S.SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. M/s.Associated Addl. Commissioner Broadcasting of Income Tax, 2132/Hyd/17 2010-11 Company Private Range-13, Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad (Presently with [PAN: AAECA2935P] Asst.CIT, Circle- 14(1), Hyderabad) M/s.Associated Broadcasting Asst. Commissioner Company Private of Income Tax, 1752/Hyd/16 Limited, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad Hyderabad [PAN: AAECA2935P] 2011-12 M/s.Associated Broadcasting Th…

Mirah Hospitality & Food Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 4693/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: The Itat In These Cases Against A Common Order Of Learned Cit(A) For A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Dated 28.5.2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of “Hotels & Resorts”, Filed The Return Of Income For The Ay 2009-2010 Declaring The Total Loss Of Rs.43,15,534/- After Set Off Of Ltcg Of Rs. 1,31,36,082/-. Assessee Is A Group Concern Of M/S. Twinkle Group. There Was A Search & Seizure Action On The Said M/S. Twinkle Group U/S 132 Of The Act. Accordingly, In Response To The Notice U/S 153A Of The Act, Assessee Filed The Return Of Income Declaring The Same Total Loss (Rs. (-) 43,15,334/-). Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153A Of The Act Determining The Total Loss Of Rs. 3,82,977/- Which Include Certain Disallowances & Rs. 27,68,422/- Is One

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…ed the following proposition with the following citations :- “No disallowance of interest under section 14A when own and non-interest bearing funds exceed investments 1. 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. 2. 383 ITR 529 (Bom.) HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT 3. 410 ITR 466 (SC) CIT v. Reliance Industries Limited II Disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed exempt income 1. 372 ITR 694 (Del.) Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 2. 286 CTR 457 (P&H) Pr. CIT v. Empire Package Pvt. Ltd 3. 96 CCH 87 (Madras) Tecpro Systems Ltd. v. UOI 4. 102 taxmann.com 438(Mum. - Trib.) ACIT v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. 5. 46 ITR(…

M/S. Kingfisher Finvest India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2642/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R

…the assessee is more than the value of investments, then the presumption is that the assessee has used interest free funds for making investments. This view is supported by the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466. There should not be any dispute that, if the assessee is able to demonstrate that the interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the value of investments and further the loan funds have not been used to make the investments, then no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for under rule 8D(2)(ii). However, since the…

M/S. Kingfisher Finvest India Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2641/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R

…the assessee is more than the value of investments, then the presumption is that the assessee has used interest free funds for making investments. This view is supported by the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466. There should not be any dispute that, if the assessee is able to demonstrate that the interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the value of investments and further the loan funds have not been used to make the investments, then no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for under rule 8D(2)(ii). However, since the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S. Kingfisher Finvest India Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2477/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, D.R

…the assessee is more than the value of investments, then the presumption is that the assessee has used interest free funds for making investments. This view is supported by the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466. There should not be any dispute that, if the assessee is able to demonstrate that the interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the value of investments and further the loan funds have not been used to make the investments, then no disallowance out of interest expenditure is called for under rule 8D(2)(ii). However, since the…

Boscj Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1582/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.1556/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. A.R

Section 14ASection 35Section 43B

…e out of interest expenditure in terms of rule 8D(2)(ii) of the I.T. Rules is called for. In support of this proposition, the Ld. A.R. placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 52. With regard to the disallowance made out of administrative expenses under rule 8D(2)(iii) of the I.T. Rules, the Ld. A.R. submitted that most of the investments made by IT(TP)A No.1556 & ITA No.1582/Bang/2014 M/s. Bosch Ltd., Bangalore Page 9 of 15 the assessee did not yield dividend income and hence, as per the decision rendered by Speci…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Bosch Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 1556/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.1556/Bang/2014 Assessmentyear:2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr. A.R

Section 14ASection 35Section 43B

…e out of interest expenditure in terms of rule 8D(2)(ii) of the I.T. Rules is called for. In support of this proposition, the Ld. A.R. placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 102 Taxmann.com 52. With regard to the disallowance made out of administrative expenses under rule 8D(2)(iii) of the I.T. Rules, the Ld. A.R. submitted that most of the investments made by IT(TP)A No.1556 & ITA No.1582/Bang/2014 M/s. Bosch Ltd., Bangalore Page 9 of 15 the assessee did not yield dividend income and hence, as per the decision rendered by Speci…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2652/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…he said interest free funds. This fact was mentioned by the CIT(A) in para 10.3 in the order. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxman 135 (Bom HC) b. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee on one hand was paying interest to the tune of Rs.1,46,26,712/- on the loan raised by it in conducting the business, at the same time, it had advanced funds to the tune of Rs. 6.37 crores without charging any interest on such huge amount. Before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee claimed that the a…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2429/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…he said interest free funds. This fact was mentioned by the CIT(A) in para 10.3 in the order. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxman 135 (Bom HC) b. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee on one hand was paying interest to the tune of Rs.1,46,26,712/- on the loan raised by it in conducting the business, at the same time, it had advanced funds to the tune of Rs. 6.37 crores without charging any interest on such huge amount. Before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee claimed that the a…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2428/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…he said interest free funds. This fact was mentioned by the CIT(A) in para 10.3 in the order. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxman 135 (Bom HC) b. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) 6. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee on one hand was paying interest to the tune of Rs.1,46,26,712/- on the loan raised by it in conducting the business, at the same time, it had advanced funds to the tune of Rs. 6.37 crores without charging any interest on such huge amount. Before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee claimed that the a…

Priapus Developers P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-20(1), New Delhi

In the result appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 310/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narsimha Charypriapus Developers Pvt Ltd, Vs. Acit, Plot No. 103-A, 1St Floor, Circle-20(1). Mahipalpur Extension, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aafcp2747R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 143Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…16 crores as available from the balance sheet, invoking the disallowance u/s 36 (1) (iii) is unwarranted in view of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of income tax (large taxpayers unit) versus Reliance Industries Ltd (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC). He also submitted a chart showing the case of the assessee compared with the case of the issue before the honourable Supreme Court and submitted that no disallowance is warranted. Therefore, he submitted that total interest expenditure of ₹ 376,982,874/– is allowable to the assessee under the head income from other sources completely. Thus,…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 2825/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh, Sr. D.R

…stries (supra) have been overruled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Munzal Sales Corporation 298 ITR 298 (SC) and the issue is now covered by Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs., Reliance Industries Ltd., 410 ITR 466 wherein it was held that “presumption is that advances are from own funds.” 5.4. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The A.O. noted in the assessment order that assessee has given interest free loans and advances of Rs.2,39,62,765/- and made disallowance of the impugned interest on the same. This fact is…

Sundaram Business Services Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 6 (3), Chennai

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

ITA 1736/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kocharheard Through Video Conferencing

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan,Addl.CITFor Respondent: 19.08.2020

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद य एवं "ी "ी र#मत कोचर, लेखा सद य के सम' BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HEARD THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1736/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 V. M/s.Sundaram Business The Income Tax Officer, Services Ltd., Corporate Ward-6(3), No.121, 7th Floor, New Block, No.21, Pattullos Road, Chennai-600 002. M.G.Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. [PAN: AAJCS 9232 J] (अपीलाथ)/Appellant) (*+यथ)/Respondent) : Mr.Saroj…

M/S. Ats Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

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

ITA 3079/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…of interest free funds, there is no need for assessee to prove the business expediency. This issue is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2019 dated 02.01.2019, citation 410 ITR 466 (SC). 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, submitted that the argument of availability of the interest-free funds with the assessee has been taken for the first time before the Tribunal and no such arguments and the documentary evidence in support thereof have been submitted by the assessee before the lower authorities and,…