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 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.

G R N Finsec Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - Circle 1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5329/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Sandeep Gosain

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhary
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 5329/Mum/2024 2015-16 Circle-1(1)(2), GRN Finsec Private 533, 5th Floor, Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, 815, Tulsiani Chambers, Maharshi Karve Road, 212, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400021. Asst. [PAN: AAFCM2069R] Commissioner of 5341/Mum/2024 2016-17 Income Tax, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agrawal & Shri Fenil Bhatt Revenue by : Shri Swapn…

Kamalnayan Investment and Trading Private Limited., Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3593/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri M.A.GohelFor Respondent: Shri Bhagirath Ramawat
Section 14ASection 250Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K (SMC)” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Kamalnayan Investment and Trading Private Limited 2nd Floor, Bajaj Bhawan, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, 226 Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021, Maharashtra. [PAN:AAACK2177P] …………. Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(2)(1), Mumbai …………. Respondent Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Ms. Vasanti Patel & Shri M.A.Gohel For the Respondent/Department : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat Date Conclusion of hearing : 16.07.2025 Pronounc…

V V Transport, Rohtak vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 989/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2017-18] V.V. Transport, Vs Acit, 96-A, Sindhu Bhawan, Rohtak Subhash Nagar, Rohtak, Haryana-124001. Pan-Aadfv5250G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Sakshi Pandey, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08.08.2025 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.01.20248 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A)/Addl/Jcit(A)-7, Kolkata [“Ld.Cit(A)”] In Appeal No.Cit(A), Rohtak/10584/2019-20 U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising From The Assessment Order Dated 20.12.2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm, Engaged In The Business Of Running Of Petrol Pump. The Return Of Income For The Year Under Appeal Was Filed On 28.10.2017, Declaring Total Income Of Inr 4,29,25,730/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Complete Scrutiny For The Reasons Of Cash Deposits During Demonetization Period & Notice U/S 143(2) Was Issued On 24.09.2018. After Considering The Submissions & The Books Of Accounts Submitted, The Ao Had Taken No Adverse Inference On The Issue Of Cash Deposited During Demonetization Period However, He Has Made Disallowance Of Inr 12,20,700/- By Holding That The Assessee Has Made Interest Free Advances To Staff & To One Of The Partners Whereas It Is Paying Interest On The Borrowings. In First Appeal, Ld.Cit(A) Has Deleted The Disallowance Made Out Of The Interest Payments Towards The Staff Advances Given However, Confirmed The Disallowance On Account Of Advances Given To The Partner Of Inr 1 Crore.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36

…failed to prove the nexus between the borrowed funds and the advance made which incidentally was not given during the year under appeal and was advanced in the preceding AYs. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) has held that where mixed funds are available, it could be presumed that the advance is given out of interest free funds. In view of the discussion made herein above and by respectfully following the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court (supra), we hold that the assessee has sufficient interest free funds in the shape of partners capital to ma…

Ponni Sugars (Erode) Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Ltu, Chennai

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

ITA 23/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Aug 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 23/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 Ponni Sugars (Erode) Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Esvin House, No.13, Vs. Of Income Tax, Rajiv Gandhi Salai (Omr), Circle-1, Ltu, Perungudi, Chennai. Chennai – 600 096. Pan: Aaccp 2779A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri N.R. Suresh, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06.08.2025

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Suresh, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250

…nds in excess of the investments made and the purpose of the borrowings have also been explained? 6. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is correct in not following the Hon'ble Supreme Court decisions? (1) CIT VS. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2012) 102 Taxmann.com 52 (2) Pr. CIT Vs Reliance Capital Assessment Management Ltd (2018) 98Taxmann.com 361 (3) South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2021) 130taxmann.com 178 SC (4) Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. UTI Bank Ltd. (2022) 142taxmann.com 136 SC 7. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was correct in applying the principles…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Prateek Apparels Private Limited, Karnataka

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3099/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…interest was called for by the AO. 12. In the subsequent appeal, before the ld.CIT(A) the same contentions were made relying on judgment of hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) and Reliance Industries Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC), where sufficient own funds are available, a presumption arises that investments are made from such funds, and no interest disallowance is warranted. Further, there is no material on record to establish any nexus between the borrowed funds and interest free advances. Accordingly, the addition made towards interest disallowance under Section…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(3), Mumbai vs. Prateek Apparels Private Limited, Karnataka

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2936/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…interest was called for by the AO. 12. In the subsequent appeal, before the ld.CIT(A) the same contentions were made relying on judgment of hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) and Reliance Industries Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC), where sufficient own funds are available, a presumption arises that investments are made from such funds, and no interest disallowance is warranted. Further, there is no material on record to establish any nexus between the borrowed funds and interest free advances. Accordingly, the addition made towards interest disallowance under Section…

Niket Ramesh Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -1 Thane, Mumbai

ITA 4958/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Mr. Niket Ramesh Shah Acit Central Circle 401, Radheshayam Chsl 1, Thane Vishnu Nagar, Naupada Vs. Thane West-400 602. Pan : Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri Subodh Ratnaparakhi
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…penditure has not been incurred for any purpose which is an offence or which is prohibited by law. 3. The Ld. AR of the appellant also relied on several decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) and CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and also on the same issue Hon'ble Bombay ITAT in the case of • Ramesh Velji Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4959/Mum/2024 dated 5.6.2025 • Mansukh Velji Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4960/Mum/2024 dated 5.6.2025 • Jenish Mansukh Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4961/Mum/2024 dated 1.1.2025 • Sachin Chandr…

DCIT, Circle- 5(2), New Delhi vs. Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3190/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalcarlsberg India Private Limited, Dy. Cit, 4Th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Circle-5(2), Commercial Complex,D-4, Saket, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aajcs8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) (Assessment Year 2010-11 Dy. Cit, Carlsberg India Private Circle-5(2), Limited, New Delhi. Vs. 4Th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aajcs8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.K. Aggarwal, Ca & Shri Paras Sharma, Ar & Ms. Ruchika Mittal, Ca Department By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Carlsberg India Private Limited, Dy. CIT, 4th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Circle-5(2), Commercial Complex,D-4, Saket, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110017. PAN-AAJCS8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 Dy. CIT, Carlsberg India Private Circle-5(2), Limited, New Delhi. Vs. 4th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi-110017. PAN-AAJCS8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CA & Shri Paras Sharma, AR &…

Carlsberg India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 5(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3150/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Manish Agarwalcarlsberg India Private Limited, Dy. Cit, 4Th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Circle-5(2), Commercial Complex,D-4, Saket, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aajcs8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) (Assessment Year 2010-11 Dy. Cit, Carlsberg India Private Circle-5(2), Limited, New Delhi. Vs. 4Th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aajcs8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.K. Aggarwal, Ca & Shri Paras Sharma, Ar & Ms. Ruchika Mittal, Ca Department By Shri S.K. Jadhav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 28/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/07/2025 Order

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Carlsberg India Private Limited, Dy. CIT, 4th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Circle-5(2), Commercial Complex,D-4, Saket, Vs. New Delhi. New Delhi-110017. PAN-AAJCS8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 Dy. CIT, Carlsberg India Private Circle-5(2), Limited, New Delhi. Vs. 4th Floor, Rectangle No.1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi-110017. PAN-AAJCS8454J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri S.K. Aggarwal, CA & Shri Paras Sharma, AR &…

La Casa De Joaillier Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2098/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 250

…ted parties amounting to over Rs.10.40 crores. In the absence of any direct nexus between borrowed funds and the interest-free deposit, no disallowance can be made on presumptive or notional basis. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466) has categorically held that where interest-free own funds are available, it shall be presumed that the assessee has utilised the same for non- interest-bearing advances. 6 La Casade Joaillier Pvt. Ltd., 12. As for the claim of finance costs aggregating to Rs.51,13,512/-, it comprises Rs.13,64,779/- towards interest on car loans and Rs.35,82,24…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1050/CHANDI/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…T 381 ITR 107 (P&H.) c) CIT Vs Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1015/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…T 381 ITR 107 (P&H.) c) CIT Vs Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1014/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…T 381 ITR 107 (P&H.) c) CIT Vs Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1013/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…T 381 ITR 107 (P&H.) c) CIT Vs Kapson Associates 381 ITR 204 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year…

Maithri Laboratories Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 291/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 50(1)Section 50(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. No. ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1. 288/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Pharmachem Asst. 2021-22 Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Commissioner of PAN:AAECM0740L Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. 2. 289/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Organics Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN:AAECM9889Q 3. 290/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Life Sciences Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., H…

Msn Life Sciences Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 290/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 50(1)Section 50(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. No. ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1. 288/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Pharmachem Asst. 2021-22 Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Commissioner of PAN:AAECM0740L Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. 2. 289/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Organics Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN:AAECM9889Q 3. 290/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Life Sciences Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., H…

Msn Organics Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 289/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 50(1)Section 50(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. No. ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1. 288/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Pharmachem Asst. 2021-22 Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Commissioner of PAN:AAECM0740L Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. 2. 289/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Organics Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN:AAECM9889Q 3. 290/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Life Sciences Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., H…

Msn Pharmachem Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT., Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 288/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Prasad, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, SR-DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 50(1)Section 50(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad श्री रविश सूद, न् याययक सदस् य एवं श्री मिुसूदन सावडिया, लेखा सदस् य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. No. ITA No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 1. 288/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Pharmachem Asst. 2021-22 Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Commissioner of PAN:AAECM0740L Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad. 2. 289/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Organics Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., Hyderabad. PAN:AAECM9889Q 3. 290/Hyd/2025 M/s. MSN Life Sciences Pvt. -do- 2021-22 Ltd., H…

Income Tax Officer, Delhi vs. Mahak Industries Private Limited, Delhi

In the result the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 661/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…ed the AO to re-compute the amount of disallowance of interest on the basis of formula given at page 47 of the order. Such observations of Ld. CIT(A) are contrary to the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019] 410 ITR 466 wherein it has held that where the assessee has sufficient interest free funds, it could be presumed that investments/advances was made out of interest free funds available with the assessee. This view is also expressed by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Limited v. DCIT (2016) 363 ITR 66 (Bom). In the instant case, assessee…

ACIT, Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…erest bearing funds, the presumption is that interest free funds were utilized for interest free investment and advances. Such a proposition of law has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in [2019] 410 ITR 466 (SC) and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT reported in [(2021) 130 taxmann.com 178 (SC)] reiterated the position ITA Nos.2330 & 2618/Chny/2019 (AY 2015-16) M/s. Ashok Leyland Ltd. :: 5 :: of law and also clarified that it is the assessee who has the right to assert from which part of the mixed funds the he i…