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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.?

2,118 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii), Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 8D, Section 10(34).

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340)

M/S Kbd Sugars & Distilleries Ltd vs. ACIT

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Assessment Years 2008-

ITA 933/BANG/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Neera Malhotra,CIT (D.R)

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

…]. ITA Nos.1362 & 1363 if 2011 JBD Sugars & Distilleries Ltd., Bangalore. 9.5.2 We shall now analyse the case laws as to whether the AO was within her realm to disallow the interest amount of Rs.10.97 crores. (i) CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (BOM): (a) In that case, the assessee claimed deduction of interest on borrowed capital. The AO recorded a finding that the sum of Rs.213 crores was invested out of its own funds and Rs.147 crores was invested out of borrowed funds. Accordingly, he disallowed interest of Rs.4.4 crores calculated at 12% per annum. The CIT (A) found that the assess…

E-City Investments & Holdings Co. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG. 8(1) (OSD), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8382/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09 E-City Investments & Holdings Dcit, Company Private Limited, Range-8(1)(Osd), बनाम/ 844/4, Shah Industrial Estate, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Off. New Link Road, Opp. M.K. Road, Laxmi Industrial Estate, Mumbai-400020 Andheri (West), Mumbai-400053 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaace8030F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Mr.J. Saravanan -Dr

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

…ollowing decisions:- i) Supreme Court in case of S.A. Builders Ltd vs CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC). ii) The ITAT judgment in the case of Indian Hotels is also very relevant. ITAT Mumbai in case of DCIT Vs. Indian Hotels Co. Ltd (276 ITR 104) ill) Reliance Utilities (313 ITR 340) 2.3 Decision 2.3.1 I have carefully considered the contention of the appellant company as well as carefully gone through the available documents on record. I find that the Ld. AO has made the disallowances of interest u/ s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act on the ground that it was for the non business purposes. The Ld. AR of the appellant contended befo…

ACIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Centrum Capital P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, revenue‟s appeal for Asst

ITA 82/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S. Centrum Capital Ltd., Vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Bombay Mutual Building, Tax 2(1), Mumbai (Respondent) 2Nd Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Pan : Aaacc5099G (Appellant) : (A.Y : 2009-10) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. Centrum Capital Ltd., Tax 2(1), Mumbai (Appellant) Bombay Mutual Building, 2Nd Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 (Respondent) Pan : Aaacc5099G

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Ojha, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…erefore no disallowance of interest u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) was warranted. The ld. CIT(A), however, upheld the disallowance of interest as he was of the view that the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) is not applicable to the facts of the case. In respect of the assessee‟s claim that while computing the opening and closing balance of investments under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the AO has wrongly included the investments made by the assessee in foreign companies, debentures, income from which is exigible to tax and application money for sh…

Centrum Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, revenue‟s appeal for Asst

ITA 7708/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain: (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S. Centrum Capital Ltd., Vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Bombay Mutual Building, Tax 2(1), Mumbai (Respondent) 2Nd Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Pan : Aaacc5099G (Appellant) : (A.Y : 2009-10) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. Centrum Capital Ltd., Tax 2(1), Mumbai (Appellant) Bombay Mutual Building, 2Nd Floor, Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 (Respondent) Pan : Aaacc5099G

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry &For Respondent: Shri Prakash Ojha, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…erefore no disallowance of interest u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) was warranted. The ld. CIT(A), however, upheld the disallowance of interest as he was of the view that the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) is not applicable to the facts of the case. In respect of the assessee‟s claim that while computing the opening and closing balance of investments under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, the AO has wrongly included the investments made by the assessee in foreign companies, debentures, income from which is exigible to tax and application money for sh…

DCIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Ravindra Mohan Gupta, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 7103/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.7103/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Shri Ravindra Mohan Gupta बनाम/ Tax 17(2) Prop. M/S. Globe Electrical Vs. R.No. 217, 2Nd Floor, Industries, 301, Piramal Chambers, Devgyan Chs Ltd., 17Th Row, Khar(W), Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai - 400052 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabpg6432F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh N. DoshiFor Respondent: Shri A. Ramchandran

Section 36(1)(iii)

…ufficient capital balance to give the interest free advances to sister concern, there appears to be no reason for disallowing any proportionate interest paid during the period under consideration. In the case of CIT Vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: (2009)313 ITR 340, the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, while dealing with an identical issue has held that “Tribunal having recorded a clear finding that the assessee possessed sufficient interest-free funds of its own which were generated in the course of the relevant financial year, apart from substantial shareholders fund, presumption stands established that the…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Bhoruka Park Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the cross objection by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 114/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CA

Section 14A

…ional amount of borrowings cannot be disallowed as the advance was given in the course of business. Therefore on the facts of the case, Applying the ratio of the decisions of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340), we hold that the interest free advance of Rs. 7.5 Crores to BSSL was made by the Assessee out of own funds and the advance was for the purpose of the business of the Assessee in the course of Joint development of property with BSSL. Hence no part of interest payable on borrowings can be disallowed on grounds of interest free advance of Rs. 7.5…

Damodar Valley Corporation, Kolkata vs. Addl. CIT, Range - 9, Kolkata

Accordingly, the ground nos. 8 & 9 in ITA No. 451/Kol/2013 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1622/KOL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri M. Balaganeshita No. 1622/Kol/2011 A.Y 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri D.S Damle, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT, ld

Section 115JSection 143(3)

…rom the point of view of businessman and not from the view point of the revenue. It is well settled that businessman knows his interest best. We place reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd ( 313 ITR 340 ) (Bom) in support of our view that if the own funds are available with the assesee and if the same are more than the investments made by the assessee, then it has to be presumed that the investments were made out of own funds and not out of borrowed funds. Hence the provisions of Rule 8D(2)(ii) cannot be invoked in these circumstances. 4.8.3. O…