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.

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 466)

DCIT Circle-4, Ludhiana vs. Rockman Industries Ltd, Ludhiana

In the result order of CIT(A) is sustained as passed and the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 748/CHANDI/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Nov 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250(6)Section 253Section 263

…here was no nexus of funds borrowed and investment made. However, as emphasized above, the assessee does not have any interest that is attributable to investment yielding exempt income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Reliance Industries Ltd, 410 ITR 466 (SC), has held that - "where interest free funds available with the assessee are sufficient to meet investments, then the presumption can be made that the investment was out of interest free funds and no disallowance of interest can be made." 5. The shareholder fund as on 31/3/2013 is at Rs. 456.47 crores and Rs. 553.57 crores as on 31/3/2014, wh…

Sachin Chandru Mirani, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle 1, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5014/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nagesh Bhimrao Pasale

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…income from only one partnership firm and the loans borrowed are invested in firms which are not earning any income. The ld. AR in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) and the decision of the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Suresh Shriram Vs. ITO 127 taxmann.com 249. 5. The ld. DR on the other hand submitted that the AO has made the addition based on the movement in the borrowed funds and the investments made in M/s Shri Neminath Buildpro and loans and advances. The ld. DR further submitted…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Archean Industries Private Limited, Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1615/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1615/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1589/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Archean Industries Private Ltd. बनाम Corporate Circle-1(1) #2, North Crescent Road, / Vs. T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7344-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr.R.Mohan Reddy, Cit & Shri M. Karthikeyan (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass (Ca) - Ld.Ar

For Appellant: Dr.R.Mohan Reddy, CIT &For Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass (CA) - Ld.AR

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…hat even otherwise, the assessee had sufficient interest free funds to make the advances. The share capital and reserves & surplus stood at Rs.115.06 Crores. Reference was made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466) to support the submissions on the presumption of usage of borrowed funds. The assessee also referred to the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shiv Sahai & Sons (I) Ltd. (428 ITR 363) holding that when there is nothing on record to show that the borrowed funds have been utilized for non-business purposes and the assessee has su…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai, Nungambakkam vs. Archean Industries Private Limited, R.A. Puram, Chennai

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA 1589/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1615/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1589/Chny/2024 (िनधा;रणवष; / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Acit M/S. Archean Industries Private Ltd. बनाम Corporate Circle-1(1) #2, North Crescent Road, / Vs. T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaca-7344-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Dr.R.Mohan Reddy, Cit & Shri M. Karthikeyan (Addl.Cit) - Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K.M. Mohandass (Ca) - Ld.Ar

For Appellant: Dr.R.Mohan Reddy, CIT &For Respondent: Shri K.M. Mohandass (CA) - Ld.AR

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…hat even otherwise, the assessee had sufficient interest free funds to make the advances. The share capital and reserves & surplus stood at Rs.115.06 Crores. Reference was made to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. (410 ITR 466) to support the submissions on the presumption of usage of borrowed funds. The assessee also referred to the decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shiv Sahai & Sons (I) Ltd. (428 ITR 363) holding that when there is nothing on record to show that the borrowed funds have been utilized for non-business purposes and the assessee has su…

Suresh Karsan Satra, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 41(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 100/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2016-17 Suresh Karsan Satra, Income Tax Officer, 604, Shashi Apartment, Ward-41(3)(4), Off Aarey Road, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Goregaon East, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai Bandra (E), Pan : Aagps5694A Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh JoshiFor Respondent: Ms. Smitha V. Nair, Addl.CIT

…ble with the assessee if the interest free funds were sufficient to meet the investments….. 8. We also note that the said decision of this Court has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd (2019)(109 taxmann.com 52/261 Taxman 165/410 ITR 466.” 5. In view of the above, the assessee would succeed in his appeal. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition of notional interest income. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 06-11-2024 [RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN] [B.R. BASKARA…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(2, Nagpur vs. M/S. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…efore, the ground of appeal of Revenue be allowed. 19. The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue in dispute is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in CIT v/s Reliance Industries Ltd. [2023] 410 ITR 466 (SC). 27 M/s. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd. ITA no.229/Nag./2022 The written submission furnished by the learned Counsel before us are reproduced herein below:– “Ground No.3: Addition of Rs.10,09,988/- u/s 14A of I.T. Act 1961. A.O. – Para 5.2 to 5.2.7 – Page 6 to 9 CIT(A) - Para 4.2 to 4.2.1 - Page 63 to 68 A) CIT(A) has deleted the addition by…

Sapphire Foods India Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai, Maharashtra

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 3476/MUM/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe, A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Smt Sujatha P. Iyangar, Sr. AR

Section 14A

….3 We further observe that the above decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (supra) also stands affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex High Court in CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2010) 10 taxman.com 52/261 taxman.com 165/410 ITR 466. 8.4 We further observe that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (14) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) has held that 8 M/s. Sapphire Foods India Limited section 14A will not apply, if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. 8.5 We also observe that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of P…

M/S.Kerala Cars P.Ltd, Cochin vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Cochin

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

ITA 63/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Kerala Cars Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Cit, Corporate Circle-1(2) 508-A, Illakkattu Building Kochi Edappally, Kunamthai Vs. Kochi 682024 [Pan: Aabck4746M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

Section 14A

…vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. 12. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd reported in 410 ITR 466 held that if interest free funds available with the assessee are sufficient to meet the investment, then it could be presumed that the investment was made out of interest free fund available with the assessee. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Supreme court is extracted as under: 7. Insofar as the first question is concerned, the issue raises…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…e above proposition of law of the Bombay High Court would now be appreciated in the following discussion. 18. In the above context, it would be apposite to refer to a similar decision in CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019] 102 taxmann.com 52/261 Taxman 165/410 ITR 466 (SC), where a Division Bench of this Court expressly held that where there is finding of fact that interest free funds available to assessee were sufficient to meet its investment it will be presumed that investments were made from such interest free funds. 19. In HDFC Bank Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 42/383 ITR 529 (Bom.), the assessee…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…ve proposition of law of the Bombay High Court would now be appreciated in the following discussion. 18. In the above context, it would be apposite to refer to a similar decision in CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019] 102 taxmann.com 52/261 Taxman 165/410 ITR 466 (SC), where a Division Bench of this Court expressly held that where there is finding of fact that interest free funds available to assessee were sufficient to meet its investment it will be presumed that investments were made from such interest free funds. 19. In HDFC Bank Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 42/383 ITR 529 (Bom.), the as…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda vs. M/S. Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 741/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Asst Year 2015-16 Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., The D.C.I.T, Plot No.201/B-1, Sun House, Circle-2(1(1), Western Express Highway, V Vadodara. Goregaon East, s Mumbai-400063. PAN: AACCS6163P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst Year 2015-16 The D.C.I.T, Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Circle-2(1(1), Plot No.201/B-1, Vadodara. Vs Sun House, Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. PAN: AACCS6163P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri SN Soparka…

Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, the Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 712/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Asst Year 2015-16 Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., The D.C.I.T, Plot No.201/B-1, Sun House, Circle-2(1(1), Western Express Highway, V Vadodara. Goregaon East, s Mumbai-400063. PAN: AACCS6163P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asst Year 2015-16 The D.C.I.T, Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd., Circle-2(1(1), Plot No.201/B-1, Vadodara. Vs Sun House, Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. PAN: AACCS6163P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri SN Soparka…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax 8(2)(1), Mumbai, Ayakar Bhavan vs. Piramal Glass Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1232/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Asst. Cit-8(2)(1), Piramal Glass Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 481, Aayakar Bhavan, 6Th Floor, Piramal Tower Annexe Maharishi Karve Road, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Mumbai-400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aabcg 0093 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Mr. Ronak Doshi &

Section 36(1)(ii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Asst. CIT-8(2)(1), Piramal Glass Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 481, Aayakar Bhavan, 6th floor, Piramal Tower Annexe Maharishi Karve Road, Vs. Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Mumbai-400020. Parel, Mumbai-400013. PAN NO. AABCG 0093 R Appellant Respondent : Mr. Ronak Doshi & Assessee by Mr. Priyank Gala Revenue by : Mr. Suresh Gaikwad, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13/08/2024 Date of pronouncement : 27/09/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal b…

M/S Capricorn Lifestyle Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. DCIT, Circle 1(1), Pune

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

ITA 376/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 143(2)

…52,59,935 was not justified. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the impugned issue was no more res Integra and the same was squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Reliance Industries Ltd. [410 ITR 466(SC)]and South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT [(2021) 438 ITR 1] and therefore, the disallowance of interest of Rs.52,59,935 ought to have been deleted. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.45,00,000 in respect of compensation paid by the appellant company to a third party towards cancellation of agreement to sale of land owne…