CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

313 ITR 340High Court2009#10 most cited

What is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. authority for?

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

2,118

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. · Section 14A · Rule 8D · interest free advances · disallowance of interest expenditure · own funds · interest-free funds

Also reported as

178 Taxmann 13513 DTR 237178 Taxmann.com 135284 CTR 414

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancesdisallowance of interest expendituresection 36(1)(iii)disallowance under section 14acommercial expediencydisallowance u/s 14asection 14abook profitssection 115jsection 36(1)section 36section 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

A.C.I.T. 8(1), Mumbai vs. Enercon India Limited, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 6751/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.6751/Mum/2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2007-08) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Enercon India Limited, –Range 8(1), Enercon Tower, A-9, Room No.210, Veera Industrial Estate, फनधभ/ Aayakar Bhavan, Veera Desai Road, Vs. M.K.Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400053

For Appellant: Shri Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri J P Bairagra
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 43(5)Section 43(5)(a)

…ition made by the AO on account of interest on the ground that the assessee‟s own funds were far more than the investment made in the subsidiaries companies and therefore relying on the decisions in the cases of CIT V/s Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), Woolcombers of India Ltd V/s CIT 1981) 23 CTR (Cal) 204 and East India Pharmaceuticals Works Ltd V/s CIT (1987) 139 CTR (SC) 372 deleted the disallowance made on account of interest while sustaining the disallowance in respect of other in direct expenses at the rate of 0.5% of the average of value of investment which came to Rs.1,35,14,428…

Khyati Realtors P.Ld, Mumbai vs. ACIT 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 129/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri K.V.Narsimhacharya
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘ए’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.129/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/s Kyati Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT-6(2), Mumbai-20 301/68, Manek Bhuvan, 1st Hindu Colony, Dadar (East), Mumbai-400014 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACCK 4422 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri K.V.Narsimhacharya सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 21/12/2015 घोषणा की…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 740/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 393/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 391/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1)

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3448/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT RG 3(1)

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3447/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

The Dy CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3415/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Mar 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ramlal Negi (Jm)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Ms. Rupinder Brar
Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…disallowance of interest expenditure relating to tax free income, apparently u/s 14A of the Act. 6. At the time of hearing learned AR placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.(313 ITR 340)(Bom) and DCIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) and submitted that interest free funds available with the assessee is more than the investment made by it and hence disallowance of interest is not called for. Learned AR also placed reliance on the decision dated 1.1.2016 rendered by the Coordinate Bench of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of Yes Bank L…

D.C.I.T.CC - Xxviii, Kol., Kolkata vs. M/S Binani Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 144/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: S/ Shri K.V. Beswal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT, ld.DR
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…as stated supra. In this regard, it relied on the unreported decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Raheja Corporation Pvt Ltd and the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) for the proposition that the Learned AO having failed to establish that borrowed funds were utilized for the purpose of acquiring the shares and in view of availability of own funds with the assessee, no expenditure ought to have been disallowed u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of IT Rules. The Learned CIT(A) duly appreciated all the co…

Usha Martin Ventures Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 6, Kolkata.

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 847/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10 Usha Martin Ventures V/S. Dcit, Circle-6 Ltd., 24, R.N.Mukherjee Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Road, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata- Chowringhee Squre, 700 001 Kolkata-700 069 [Pan No.Aaacu 3843 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 48Section 50(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri Mahavir Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member Assessment Year :2009-10 Usha Martin Ventures V/s. DCIT, Circle-6 Ltd., 24, R.N.Mukherjee Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, Road, 2nd Floor, Kolkata- Chowringhee Squre, 700 001 Kolkata-700 069 [PAN No.AAACU 3843 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCA अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sandeep Choube, CIT-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 21-01-2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 29-02-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem…

Yardley Investment & Trading Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT(A) -3, Mumbai

Accordingly the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5419/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5419/M/15 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S. Yardley Investment & Income Tax Officer 1(3)(2) बनाम/ Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Vs. 01, Pearl Mansion, (N)(91), Mumbai - 400020 M. K. Road, Mumbai - 400013 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacy0327M

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. V. S. Jadhav
Section 14Section 14A

…ustice. The learned representative of the assessee also place reliance on law settled in ITO Vs. Pioneer Radio Training Services Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 4448/Del/2013)(order dated 19.01.2015), Delhi Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), Bombay High Court, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai in case of EIH Associated Hotels Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (Jurisdictional High Court)(347 ITR 272), Wimco Seedlings Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Third Member)(107 ITD 267), CIT Vs. Hero Cycles (Panjab & Haryana High Court) (323 ITR 518), ACIT V…

Lee & Muirhead P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6518/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 7435 /Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax -Range 2(2) बनधम/ Room No. 548, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg, Vs. Fort Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai 400023. Mumbai 400020. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 7849/Mum/2011 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Asstt. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax (Osd) Circle 2(2), बनधम/ Room No. 545, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Fort, Mumbai 400020. Mumbai 400023. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacl0918M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No 6518/Mum/2012 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Lee & Murihead Pvt. Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Of Income Oricon House, 2Nd Floor Tax -Range 2(2) बनधम/ Room No. 548, 5Th Floor 12-K, Dubhash Marg, Vs. Fort Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai 400023. Mumbai 400020. (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan : Aaaclo918M & Other Two Appeals.

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Kamal
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…hat were taken for specific purposes and used accordingly. Thus the additions of Rs. 5,50,586/- made rule 8D(2)(ii) as confirmed by CIT(A) is ordered to be deleted by following the ratio laid down in the case of CIT V/s Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), and CIT V/s HDFC BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom). In respect of Rs. 14,61,622/-, the disallowance under rule 8D(2)(iii) we find that the investments were made in the mutual funds by the portfolio management companies. Further in the schedule M pertaining to Administrative and Selling Expenses the total of Rs. 14,91,12,604/- were charged…

Shri Ashok P. Shah, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 19(2), Mumbai

ITA 2163/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2163/M/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" "नधा"रण वष" "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) "नधा"रण वष" Shri Ashok P. Shah, Asst. Commissioner Of C/O. M/S. Friendship, Income Tax, 112 Arun Bazar Station Circle 19(2), बनाम/Vs. बनाम बनाम बनाम Road, Mumbai Santacruz (West), Mumbai – 400 054 Pan: Aljps 3432L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri V.P. Kothari, A.R. Revenue By : Ms. Vinita J. Menon, D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 12.02.2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.02.2016 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Kothari, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Vinita J. Menon, D.R

…nsequently the interest paid by the partner for the purpose of earning the remuneration must also be deducted. The Ld. A.R. has further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.” (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), wherein, it has been held that where sufficient own/interest free funds are available to the assessee on the date of investment, then the presumption is that the investment is used from the own/interest free funds available to the assessee. 10. After considering the submissions of the Ld. A.R., we find that the issue is squarely covered b…

Arj Shares & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG. 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1473/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1473/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 55(2)(ab)

…be made u/s 14A of the Act since own funds of the assesse i.e. share capital + reserves are sufficient to cover up the value of investments. In order to support the said contention, reliance is placed on the following decisions. a) CIT v. Reliance Utilities [313 ITR 340 (Bom)] b) CIT v. HDFC Bank [366 ITR 505 (Bom)] c) M/s. Alchemic Financila Services Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT in ITA No. 6349/Mum/11 for A.Y. 2008-09.” 8. After analyzing the afore mentioned findings we are of the view that it has been rightly held that as per specific provisions of section 55(2)(ab) of the Act, the cost of acquisition in relation to eq…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S John Distilleries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

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

ITA 1565/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.John Distilleries Ltd., No.110, Pantharapaly,A Mysore Road, Bangalore-39. … Appellant Pan:Aaacj 4322 P Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(5), Bangalore. … Respondent & (By The Revenue) ****** Assessee By : Shri H.V.Gowthama, Ca. Revenue By : Shri T.N.Prakash, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Shri H.V.Gowthama, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N.Prakash, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…provision. The reasoning of the ld.CIT(A) is supported by the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. (323 ITR 518) ii. CIT vs. Gujarat Industries Ltd. (218 Taxman 142); and iii. CIT vs. Kribhco (349 ITR 618) and iv. Reliance Utility and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) In the abovementioned cases, it has been held that it should be presumed that the assessee used own funds for making investments where assessee had both own funds as well as borrowed funds. The ld.CIT(A), on the same parity of reasoning, directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs.75,67,905/- under ITA Nos.1429 & 1565/Bang/2014 Page 9 of 10 ru…

M/S John Distilleries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

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

ITA 1429/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijaypal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.John Distilleries Ltd., No.110, Pantharapaly,A Mysore Road, Bangalore-39. … Appellant Pan:Aaacj 4322 P Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(5), Bangalore. … Respondent & (By The Revenue) ****** Assessee By : Shri H.V.Gowthama, Ca. Revenue By : Shri T.N.Prakash, Addl.Cit

For Appellant: Shri H.V.Gowthama, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N.Prakash, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…provision. The reasoning of the ld.CIT(A) is supported by the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. (323 ITR 518) ii. CIT vs. Gujarat Industries Ltd. (218 Taxman 142); and iii. CIT vs. Kribhco (349 ITR 618) and iv. Reliance Utility and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) In the abovementioned cases, it has been held that it should be presumed that the assessee used own funds for making investments where assessee had both own funds as well as borrowed funds. The ld.CIT(A), on the same parity of reasoning, directed the AO to delete the addition of Rs.75,67,905/- under ITA Nos.1429 & 1565/Bang/2014 Page 9 of 10 ru…

M/S. International Clearing & Shipping Agency, Chennai vs. Additional CIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Department and Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2209/CHNY/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2209/Mds/2010 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-2008. M/S. International Clearing Vs. The Additional Commissioner Of Shipping Agency, Income Tax, Old No.158, New No.325, Business Range-Viii, Linghi Chetty Street, Parrys, Chennai Chennai 600 001. [Pan Aaafi 0178B ]

For Appellant: Shri. R. Vijayarghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Nischal, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37

…it is held that the interest on borrowed funds advanced in the course of business cannot be disallowed and also supported with High Court decision in the case of Hotel Savera vs. CIT 239 ITR 795 (Mad) and CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Industries & Powers Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) where it is held that if there is sufficient balance available in current or capital account to cover the advances no disallowance could be made and accordingly Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition. ITA Nos.2209/10 & 93/11 :- 14 -: 8.3 Before us, the ld. Departmental Representative argued that the Commissioner of I…

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 3759/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.3759/M/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) फनाभ/ Dcit-4(1), M/S. India Advantage R.No. 640, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Securities Ltd., Vs. 4Th Floor, Om Plaza, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Vasanji Lalji Road, Kandivali (W), Mumbai-67. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aadcp5317M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) I.T.A. No.3576/M/2014 (Assessment Year: 2009-2010) M/S. India Advantage फनाभ/ Dcit-4(1), R.No. 640, 6Th Floor, Securities Ltd., Vs. 4Th Floor, Om Plaza, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vasanji Lalji Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Kandivali (W), Mumbai-67. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aadcp5317M (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri Dharmesh Shah प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Revenue By : Shri Santosh Mankoskar, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Mankoskar, DR
Section 73

…the said Tribunal’s order as well as the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court for the AY 2008-2009 and decide the issue afresh. The arguments relating to the applicability of the High Court judgment in the case Reliance Utilities and Power Limited [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) is also remanded to the file of the AO for similar adjudication. AO shall grant a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the set principles of natural justice. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.…

Aplab Ltd, Thane vs. ACIT RG 1, Thane

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8545/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2016AY 2008-09
Section 36(1)(iii)

…reserves and surplus of Rs 22,52,14,000. As against this, the assessee has advanced only a sum of Rs 44.71 lakh to its sister concerns without interest. 13. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [(2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom)] considered almost similar facts. In that case the AO recorded a finding that a sum of Rs.213 crores was invested by the assessee out of their own funds and Rs.1.74 crores out of borrowed funds. Accordingly, disallowance of interest was made to the tune of Rs.2.40 crores. It was argued on behalf of the assessee that no part of interest bear…