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 367,181 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.

M/S. C & S Electric Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The Appeals are allowed

ITA 2033/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 10ASection 10BSection 801CSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2033/Del/2014, A.Y.2009-10 ITA No. 6178/Del/2014, A.Y.2010-11 ITA No. 3381/Del/2016, A.Y.2011-12 M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (Formerly known as Controls & LTU, New Delhi Switchgear Co. Ltd.) 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Phase-III, New Delhi- 110020 PAN : AAACC0909K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Anil Bhalla, CA Revenue by Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sh…

Bhatia Sons (India) Ltd, Indore vs. The ITO 1(2) Indore, Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 279/IND/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibhatia Sons Ltd Ito-1(2) Bcc House, 8/5 Indore Vs. Manoramaganj Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadcb8947K Assessee By Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.08.2023

Section 139(1)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, इंदौर "यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bhatia Sons Ltd ITO-1(2) BCC House, 8/5 Indore Vs. Manoramaganj Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) PAN: AADCB8947K Assessee by Shri Harsh Vijayvargiya, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 21.08.2023 O R D E R Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 03.02.2020 of Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-I, Indore, for Ass…

ACIT Cir-1, Dhanbad vs. M/S Bharat Cooking Coal Ltd, Dhanbad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 304/RAN/2017[14-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi18 Aug 2023

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण र ांची पीठ, कोलक त में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वचचुअल कोर्ु] [Virtual Court] श्री र जेश कचम र, लेख सदस्य एवां श्री सांजय शम ु, न्य धयक सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 303 & 304/RAN/2017 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 ACIT, Circle-1(1), Dhanbad.......................................Appellant Vs. M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited...………...............Respondent [PAN: AAACB 7934 M] C.O. Nos.: 12 & 13/RAN/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited...……….......…

ACIT Cir-1, Dhanbad vs. M/S Bharat Cooking Coal Ltd, Dhanbad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 303/RAN/2017[13=14]Status: PendingITAT Ranchi18 Aug 2023

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण र ांची पीठ, कोलक त में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH AT KOLKATA [वचचुअल कोर्ु] [Virtual Court] श्री र जेश कचम र, लेख सदस्य एवां श्री सांजय शम ु, न्य धयक सदस्य के समक्ष Before SRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.: 303 & 304/RAN/2017 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 ACIT, Circle-1(1), Dhanbad.......................................Appellant Vs. M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited...………...............Respondent [PAN: AAACB 7934 M] C.O. Nos.: 12 & 13/RAN/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited...……….......…

Apeejay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 119/KOL/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…d for since the assessee has sufficient interest free funds available for making the investments in the equity shares. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. reported in [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay) and HDFC Bank Ltd. 376 ITR 553, it is contended that interest disallowance is uncalled for in all the impugned four Assessment Years. 9.1. So far as the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules is concerned it was claimed that as regards Assessment Years 2013-14, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer at Rs.2,42,350/-, the…

Apeejay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 118/KOL/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…d for since the assessee has sufficient interest free funds available for making the investments in the equity shares. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. reported in [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay) and HDFC Bank Ltd. 376 ITR 553, it is contended that interest disallowance is uncalled for in all the impugned four Assessment Years. 9.1. So far as the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules is concerned it was claimed that as regards Assessment Years 2013-14, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer at Rs.2,42,350/-, the…

Apeejay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 117/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…d for since the assessee has sufficient interest free funds available for making the investments in the equity shares. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. reported in [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay) and HDFC Bank Ltd. 376 ITR 553, it is contended that interest disallowance is uncalled for in all the impugned four Assessment Years. 9.1. So far as the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules is concerned it was claimed that as regards Assessment Years 2013-14, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer at Rs.2,42,350/-, the…

Apeejay Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 116/KOL/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 116/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhrajyoti Bhattacharjee, CIT D/R
Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

…d for since the assessee has sufficient interest free funds available for making the investments in the equity shares. Placing reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. reported in [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay) and HDFC Bank Ltd. 376 ITR 553, it is contended that interest disallowance is uncalled for in all the impugned four Assessment Years. 9.1. So far as the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules is concerned it was claimed that as regards Assessment Years 2013-14, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer at Rs.2,42,350/-, the…

Jagson International Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-13(1), Delhi

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

ITA 902/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Jagson International Ltd., Vs Dcit, H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Jangpura Extension, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Jagson International Ltd., H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Delhi Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Saxena, Ms Sumangla Saxena & Shri Shyam Sunder, Advocates Revenue By : Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 407

…payment of interest and loan advanced. a) ITA No. 1231 with CM 16759/2009 dated 02.12.2009 CIT vs. Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. b) 260 ITR 637 (Dei) CIT vs. Tin Box Co. c) 177 Taxman 300 (Del) CIT vs. DCM Ltd. d) 184 Taxman 352 (Del) CIT vs. H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. e) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. f) 29 SOT 531 (Mum) Metro Exports Ltd. vs. ITO g) 20 SOT 47 (Mum) Tata Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT h) 194 CTR 451 (All) CIT vs. RadicoKhaitan Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) held that the Hon'ble Supreme Court while giving judgment in the case of Madhav Prasad Jatia V. CIT, (SC) 118 ITR 200 has established that the e…

JCIT Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1303/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Jagson International Ltd., Vs Dcit, H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Jangpura Extension, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Jagson International Ltd., H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Delhi Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Saxena, Ms Sumangla Saxena & Shri Shyam Sunder, Advocates Revenue By : Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 407

…payment of interest and loan advanced. a) ITA No. 1231 with CM 16759/2009 dated 02.12.2009 CIT vs. Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. b) 260 ITR 637 (Dei) CIT vs. Tin Box Co. c) 177 Taxman 300 (Del) CIT vs. DCM Ltd. d) 184 Taxman 352 (Del) CIT vs. H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. e) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. f) 29 SOT 531 (Mum) Metro Exports Ltd. vs. ITO g) 20 SOT 47 (Mum) Tata Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT h) 194 CTR 451 (All) CIT vs. RadicoKhaitan Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) held that the Hon'ble Supreme Court while giving judgment in the case of Madhav Prasad Jatia V. CIT, (SC) 118 ITR 200 has established that the e…

M/S. Sunil & Company, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 502/JODH/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur03 Aug 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

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

…Industries Ltd. for A.Y 2003- 27-31 04 and A.Y 2004-05 6 Order of Hon’ble ITAT in the case of appellant for A.Y 32-31 2004-05 in which the issue relating to interest was set aside. 7 Judgment in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power 42-43 Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) 8 Judgment in the case of S. A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 44-45 206 CTR 631 (SC) 8.1 The ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the submission filed before the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has not appreciated the fact of the case and before dealing with the fact he draw our attention to the finding of the ITAT in first rou…

Income Tax Officer Ward - 1(1)(1), Surat vs. V R Surat Pvt. Ltd. Formerly Known As M/S Dhanlaxmi Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee (in CO

ITA 329/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.329/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Physical Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward- Vs. V R Surat Pvt. Ltd. 1(1)(1), Surat, Room No.111, 1St (Formerly Known As M/S. Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Dhanlaxmi Infrastructure Pvt. Gate, Surat-395001 Ltd.,).F. No.29, Virtuous Retail, Surat Dumas, Nr. Dumas Resort, Magdalla, Surat– 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaccd5578R (Assessee) (Respondent) ""या"ेप. सं./Co No.16/Srt/2022 [Arising Out Of Ita No.329/Srt/2022] Assessment Year: (2015-16)

Section 14Section 143(3)

…f CIT v/s. Torrent Power Limited (2014) 363 ITR 474 (Guj. HC), wherein when the assessee had surplus funds for making investment, provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked. Further, Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), wherein it was held that if there are interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investments and at the same time the assessee had raised a loan it can be presumed that the investments were from the interest free funds available. On perusal of the above facts and judicial precedents, I am of the opinion that when…

Wns Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm. of Income Tax -14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2451/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

…1 ITA 2450 & 2451/Mum/2022 WNS Global Services Pvt Ltd THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.2450 & 2451/Mum/2022 (Assessment year 2018-2019 & 2017-18) WNS GLOBAL SERVICES vs Assistant Commissioner of Income- PRIVATE LIMITED tax-14(1)(2), Mumbai 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan PL.10/11, GATE NO.4, GODREJ BOYCE COMPLEX, M.K. Road, Mumbai FIRSHANAGAR, L.B.S. MARG VIKHROLI (WEST), MUMBAI PAN : AAACW2598L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Mr. Porus Kaka, Manish Kanth Department represented by Smt.So…

Wns Global Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Comm. of Income Tax-14(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2450/MUM/2022[208-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234CSection 43BSection 92C

…1 ITA 2450 & 2451/Mum/2022 WNS Global Services Pvt Ltd THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE VIKAS AWASTHY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No.2450 & 2451/Mum/2022 (Assessment year 2018-2019 & 2017-18) WNS GLOBAL SERVICES vs Assistant Commissioner of Income- PRIVATE LIMITED tax-14(1)(2), Mumbai 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan PL.10/11, GATE NO.4, GODREJ BOYCE COMPLEX, M.K. Road, Mumbai FIRSHANAGAR, L.B.S. MARG VIKHROLI (WEST), MUMBAI PAN : AAACW2598L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Mr. Porus Kaka, Manish Kanth Department represented by Smt.So…

The Ferozpur Cantt Primary Co-Op Agri Dev. Bank Limited, Ferozpur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range (III), Ferozpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 524/ASR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…l of the Revenue on this ground. We do not find that question (A) gives rise to any substantial question of law and is therefore rejected.” I.T.A. No. 524/Asr/2018 5 Assessment Year: 2015-16 He further relied on the order of the CIT vs. Reliance Utilities 313 ITR 340 (Bom). 5. The ld. DR vehemently argued and relied on the order of the ld. AO the relevant paragraph is reproduced as below: I.T.A. No. 524/Asr/2018 6 Assessment Year: 2015-16 I.T.A. No. 524/Asr/2018 7 Assessment Year: 2015-16 5.1 He further relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) the relevant paragraph is reproduced as below: I.T.A. No.…

Aegis Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2247/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 36(1)(iii)

…investments have been made with assessee’s own funds and not with borrowed funds. Few of such decisions are as under:-  Reliance Industries Ltd [ 2019] 410 ITR 466 (SC)  South Indian Bank Ltd (438 ITR 1) (SC) (2021)  CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (313 ITR 340) (Bom HC)  HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT (383 ITR 529) (Bom HC)  Ashok Commercial Enterprises (ITA (L) No 2985 of 2009) (Bom HC) 23. Moreover, this Tribunal in A.Y.2009-10 had deleted the similar disallowance which reads as under:- “57 In such a situation, where the assessee has substantial own funds, then presumption is that assessee has given advanc…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd (in Respect of M.S, Icici Ltd Merged With M.S, Icici Bank Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8435/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640, has held that doctrine of apportionment would apply in respect of interest expenditure. He submitted that the law laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340(Bom) and CIT vs.HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom) is not a good law. He vehemently argued that the interest expenditure should be apportioned and disallowance should be made to the extent of apportionment of borrowed funds are utilized for earning exempt income. He further contended that for the purpose of ascertaining the fund position available…

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8420/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640, has held that doctrine of apportionment would apply in respect of interest expenditure. He submitted that the law laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340(Bom) and CIT vs.HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom) is not a good law. He vehemently argued that the interest expenditure should be apportioned and disallowance should be made to the extent of apportionment of borrowed funds are utilized for earning exempt income. He further contended that for the purpose of ascertaining the fund position available…

Add. CIT Spl Range--3, New Delhi vs. Dlf Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 5919/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.5978/Del/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.2238/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No.5919/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 801A

…for the purpose of computing interest disallowance. Ld. CIT (A) has presumed proportion of utilisation of funds in absence of the nexus holding that assesse has used mixed funds. Honourable Bombay High court in case of CIT V Reliance Utilities & Power limited 313 ITR 340 has held that “The principle therefore would be that if there are funds available both interest-free and overdraft and/or loans taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds were sufficient to meet the investments.” Therefore we are…

Add. CIT Spl Range--3, New Delhi vs. Dlf Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 2238/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.5978/Del/2017, A.Y. 2014-15 Ita No.2238/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Ita No.5919/Del/2019, A.Y. 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 801A

…for the purpose of computing interest disallowance. Ld. CIT (A) has presumed proportion of utilisation of funds in absence of the nexus holding that assesse has used mixed funds. Honourable Bombay High court in case of CIT V Reliance Utilities & Power limited 313 ITR 340 has held that “The principle therefore would be that if there are funds available both interest-free and overdraft and/or loans taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds were sufficient to meet the investments.” Therefore we are…