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 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.

M/S. Khyati Realities Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 552/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…has referred a number of judicial pronouncements stating that when assessee has substantial interest free funds, disallowance u/s. 14A is unwarranted. The judicial pronouncements referred by the ld. counsel are placed below. CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. -410 ITR 466 (SC) CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. - 363 ITR 474 (Guj) CIT vs. Suzlan Energy Ltd. – 354 ITR 630 (Guj) CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I). Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. -313 ITR 340 (Bom) Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT- 298 ITR 298 (SC…

Mdl Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6127/DEL/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2015-16] & [A.Y 2016-17] Mdl Energy Pvt Ltd Vs. The A. C.I.T B-8/14, Vasant Vihar Central Circle – 13, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaccm 7517 K [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Pramita M. Biswas, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ompanies in their respective businesses and, therefore, interest paid has to be allowed u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act as per the ration laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) and Reliance Industries 410 ITR 466. The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the assessee was having sufficient own funds to make investment and, therefore, on this count also, no disallowance can be made. 13. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities. It is the say of the ld. DR that it is not the objective of the appellant compa…

Mdl Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6126/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Pramita M. Biswas, CIT- DR

Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

Prashid Construction Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4121/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip-Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 36(1)(iii)

…1 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4121/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/s. Prashid Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer-10(3)(4) बनाम R.No. 554, 5th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan नाम नाम/ नाम Bhani 6, Vithal Nagar Society N.S. Road No.10, Juhu Scheme M.K. Road Vs. Vile Parle, Mumbai- 400 049. Mumbai - 400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AACCP-5073-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (ू"यथ"…

M/S Deepak Cales Inda Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

ITA 1286/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234Section 36Section 41

…interest free funds available to the assessee as on 31.03.2012 is Rs.547,01,81,958/-, which is far in excess of the advances given to the associated enterprises of Rs.39,33,17,901/-. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) has held that no interest disallowance can be made if the interest free funds available to the assessee exceed the advances made for non-business purposes. Following the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court (supra), the interest disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act to the extent sustained by the CIT(A) is hereby deleted.…

M/S Deepak Cales Inda Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeals for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13 are partly allowed

ITA 1285/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234Section 36Section 41

Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3184/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Neil Phillip

Section 14A

…In support of such contention, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Reliance Utility and Power Ltd., [2005] 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v/s Reliance Industries Ltd., [2005] 410 ITR 466 (SC). Besides the above, learned Authorised Representative also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble P&H High Court in CIT v/s Holyfaith International Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 407 ITR 445 (P&H). 14. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the observations of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer. 15. We have consi…

Klt Automotive and Tubular Products Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1508/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Klt Automotive & Dcit-10(1)(2) Tubular Products Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, B-601, Elegant Business Park, Mumbai-4000020. Midc Road No. 2, J B Nagar, Vs. Andheri(East), Mumbai-400059. Pan: Aaact3895R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Yagnesh Desai With Shri Hemant Bahedia (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 16.04.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.05.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Under Section 253 Of Income-Tax Act (‘Act’) Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred As Ld. Cit(A)] Dated 20.12.2017 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Sole Ground Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Dy.Cit Has Erred In Disallowing The Interest Expenses Of Rs. 1,42,78,820/- As Capital In Nature U/S. 36(1)(Iii) During The Year. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Frame Assembly Of Chesis & Tubes, Filed

For Appellant: Shri Yagnesh Desai with Shri Hemant Bahedia (AR)For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai (DR)

Section 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…submits that the assessee has utilized his own funds from the capital and reserve for making the said investment. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466). The ld. AR of the assessee further invited our attention on the Profit & Loss Account as on 31.03.2013 wherein the assessee has shown to have own Reserve & Surplus of Rs. 189.25 Crore and share capital of Rs.8.85 Crore (page -19 of PB). 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. DR furt…

Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3738/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. N. S. Sainiita No. 3650/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Nhpc Ltd., Tax, Circle-Ii, Nhpc Complex, Sector-33, Faridabad Faridabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0149C Ita No. 3738/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 M/S Nhpc Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Nhpc Complex, 4Th Floor, Tax, Circle-Ii, Finance Div, Sector-33, Faridabad Faridabad-121003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0149C Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Himanshu Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 06.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.05.2019 Order Per N. S. Saini:

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHE ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Bhavnesh Saini, Judicial Member And Sh. N. S. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No. 3650/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs M/s NHPC Ltd., Tax, Circle-II, NHPC Complex, Sector-33, Faridabad Faridabad (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN0149C ITA No. 3738/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 M/s NHPC Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income NHPC Complex, 4th Floor, Tax, Circle-II, Finance Div, Sector-33, Faridabad Faridabad-121003 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN0149C Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. & Sh. Him…

DCIT, Faridabad vs. M/S. Nhpc Ltd., Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3650/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2019AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Amit Katoch, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43A

M/S. Nagaur Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Nagaur vs. DCIT, Circle, Nagaur

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 437/JODH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri A. T. Varkeym/S. Nagaur Automobiles Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd.,Mundawa Income-Tax, Circle- Nagpur Road,Nagaur. Pan: Aabcn3622M

Section 36(1)(iii)

…mixed funds which includes its own funds in sufficient quantity, a presumption that its own funds were utilized for advance is to be drawn. This proposition of law has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. Reported in 410 ITR 466 by order dated 02.01.2019. Moreover, we note that the assessee has not claimed any interest expenditure on this advance given to the charitable organization. Therefore, the question of disallowance at the first instance did not arise. So, the action of the AO is arbitrary in nature and addition of notional interest is antithesis to the concept of…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6930/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Hiro Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 28Section 73

…A) has correctly deleted the disallowance. The case of the assessee is also squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC). We, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. and also the Hon’ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra), hold that the disallowance under rule 8D2(ii) was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) and the ground Nos.2 to 4 are hereby dis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3883/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR

Section 142Section 147Section 153Section 153ASection 201(1)Section 36Section 40Section 40A(3)

…herefore submitted that position has to be examined in totality and it is not open to consider entries in bank account in a distorted and isolated manner. He further relied up on several judicial precedents as under : i. CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 466 (SC) ii. CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd. 51 DTR 98 (Del.) iii. CIT Vs. Tin Box Co. 260 ITR 637 (Del.) Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 iv. CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) 23. He submitted that in light of factual and…

M/S Iol Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C -6, Ludhiana

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 1451/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1450 & 1451/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 &2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)

…te the details submitted by the assessee. The Ld. counsel has also submitted that the lower authorities have also failed to consider the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ‘CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd.’ [2010] 410 ITR 466 (SC), wherein, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has again 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 had used its own / interest free funds for the said investment. 7. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the find…

M/S Iol Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C -6, Ludhiana

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 1450/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1450 & 1451/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 &2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, Sr. DR

Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)

M/S. Rtc Restaurants (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of Assessee allowed

ITA 2942/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Jaspal Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr.D.R

…vestments. In this case this presumption was established considering the finding of fact both by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal. The interest was deductible. 6.1. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Limited (2019) 410 ITR 446 (SC) has held as under : 9 ITA.No.2942/Del./2016 M/s. RTC Restaurants (India) Ltd., New Delhi. “Business expenditure – Interest on borrowed capital – Finding of Tribunal that interest-free funds available with assessee sufficient to meet investment – Presumption that investments in subsidiaries were out of interest-free funds – Interest referabl…

Gvk Power & Infrastructure Limited, Kadiyam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 553/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Gvk Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.5-48, Gvk Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, Kadiyammandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [Pan :Aaacj5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant By Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 5

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/VIZ/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/s GVK Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner of D.No.5-48, GVK Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, KadiyamMandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [PAN :AAACJ5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant…

Rgs Healthcare Private Limited, Mohali vs. DCIT, C-6(1), Mohali

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

ITA 1208/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ 1208/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR

Section 250

…ourt in the case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. (supra) will squarely applicable to the facts of the case in hand. Moreover, the issue is now covered by the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC). This issue is accordingly decided in favour of the assessee. The disallowance made by the lower authorities is accordingly, deleted. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court. एन. के. सैनी संजय गग" (N.K. SAINI (SANJAY GARG ) उपा"य"/ Vice President "याय"क सद"य/ Judicial Member "द…

Express Airtronics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1402/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1402/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 बिाम/ Express Airotronics Pvt. Ito 2(1)(3), Mumbai Ltd., (Now Merged With Net Work Telelink Private Ltd.) V. B-14 Valmiki Apartments, Next To Bombay College Of Pharmacy, Sunder Nagar, Kalina, Mumbai 400098 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaace0826H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri. D.G. Pansari (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1402/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 02.12.2015 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-4/It-14/Ito-2(1)(3)/2014-15, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2011-12, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 14.03.2014 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2011-12. I.T.A. No.1402/Mum/2016

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. D.G. Pansari (DR)

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

…king investments . This is purely a finding of fact which need to be investigated on year to year basis by unfolding facts from the financial records of the tax-payer. The decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466(SC) will be applicable, wherein it was held as under : 7. Insofar as the first question is concerned, the issue raises a pure question of fact. The High Court has noted the finding of the Tribunal that the interest free funds available to the assessee were sufficient to meet its investment. Hence, it could be presumed that the investments were ma…

ACIT, Chandigarh vs. M/S A.B. Sugars Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, there is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed

ITA 1051/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1051/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 The Dcit, M/S A.B. Sugars Ltd., बनाम Circle 1(1), (Formerly Known As M/S Guru Chandigarh Teg Bahadur Sugar Ltd.,) H.No. 77,Sector 11-A, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcg3045M अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sandeep Dahiya, CA

Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)

…by the assessee is out of own funds. 6. Now the issue is also squarely covered by the decision of the ITA No. 1051/Chd/2018- M/s A.B. Sugars Ltd., Chandigarh 4 Hon'ble Supreme Court in in ‘CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd’ [2019] 102 taxmann.com 52 (SC) / 410 ITR 466 (SC). We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. 7. Ground No.5 : Vide this ground, the Revenue has agitated the disallowance made by the Assessing officer of Rs. 11,08,624/- u/s 14A of the Act at Rs. 1.19 lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case…