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)

Anil Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-63(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2826/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Astha Chandra

Section 143(3)

…erest free funds available with the assessee, it is to be presumed that the amount advanced is out of interest free funds. In support of his aforesaid contention, he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom). He further submitted that the aforesaid decision of Bombay High Court has been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court and the same is reported in (2019) 20 Supreme Court Cases 478. He also placed reliance on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raghuvir Synthetics Ltd. (Tax Appeal No.829 of 2007). He therefore submitted tha…

Anil Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-63(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2825/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Astha Chandra

Section 143(3)

…erest free funds available with the assessee, it is to be presumed that the amount advanced is out of interest free funds. In support of his aforesaid contention, he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom). He further submitted that the aforesaid decision of Bombay High Court has been upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court and the same is reported in (2019) 20 Supreme Court Cases 478. He also placed reliance on the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Raghuvir Synthetics Ltd. (Tax Appeal No.829 of 2007). He therefore submitted tha…

A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 67/KOL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Virtual Court] (Before Sri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member) I.T.A. No.: 2492/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd.........................................Appellant [PAN: AAGCS 8492 P] Vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata…………………………….........................Respondent I.T.A. No.: 67/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata.............................................................Appellant Vs. M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd…………..........................Respondent [PAN: AA…

M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC-3(2), Kolkata

ITA 2492/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Manish Borad)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40Section 68Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Virtual Court] (Before Sri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member & Sri Manish Borad, Accountant Member) I.T.A. No.: 2492/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd.........................................Appellant [PAN: AAGCS 8492 P] Vs. ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata…………………………….........................Respondent I.T.A. No.: 67/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata.............................................................Appellant Vs. M/s. Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd…………..........................Respondent [PAN: AA…

ACIT, Cen, Cir-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2304/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…Assessee has filed the necessary charts in this regard showing own funds and investments. The learned counsel for the Assessee has placed strong reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) wherein proposition similar to the one canvass by the Assessee was accepted. 143. We are of the view the submission made with regard to availability of own funds in the light of overall funds position without insisting on direct nexus between investments and own funds would be the right approach as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in t…

ACIT, Cen.Cir.-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrsteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2303/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…Assessee has filed the necessary charts in this regard showing own funds and investments. The learned counsel for the Assessee has placed strong reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) wherein proposition similar to the one canvass by the Assessee was accepted. 143. We are of the view the submission made with regard to availability of own funds in the light of overall funds position without insisting on direct nexus between investments and own funds would be the right approach as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in t…

M/S. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’,VC, JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 201, 291/JP/2017 & 744/JP/2018 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. cuke M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Chemicals Ltd., Gadepan, Circle-2, District Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAACC 9762 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 170, 335/JP/2017 & 821/J…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. ACIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’,VC, JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 201, 291/JP/2017 & 744/JP/2018 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. cuke M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Chemicals Ltd., Gadepan, Circle-2, District Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAACC 9762 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 170, 335/JP/2017 & 821/J…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. DCIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCH ‘B’,VC, JAIPUR Jh lanhi xkslkbZ] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;arHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 201, 291/JP/2017 & 744/JP/2018 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 13-14 & 14-15. cuke M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Chemicals Ltd., Gadepan, Circle-2, District Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAACC 9762 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 170, 335/JP/2017 & 821/J…

Niraj Kumar Associates Pvt.Ltd, Pashan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Pune

Appeal is allowed for stastical purposes in above terms

ITA 2565/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.2565/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Niraj Kumar Associates Pvt. Ltd., 129/2, Mont Vert Marc, Pashan-Sus Road, Pashan – 411 021 .......अपऩलधथी / Appellant Pan : Aaacn6424G बनधम / V/S. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent Acit, 2, Pune

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ncial’s position as well as corresponding shareholder funds and unsecured loans totaling to Rs.55,45,13,814/- as against the average balance of investment amount of Rs.36,79,29,350/- taken in the CIT(A)’s order. He quotes CIT Vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 (Bom) that necessary presumption is such an instance is of investment of interest free funds only. Learned lower authorities do not seem to have considered all these clinching aspects in their respective orders. We thus restore this proportionate interest expenditure disallowance issue back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh adjudication as…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7214/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

…cision of High Court of Gujrat in case of KRISHNA TEXTILES 310 ITR 227 (GUJ)holding onus on revenue to prove that the income really belong to assesse. In para 16 referred the fact that all payments were made through banking channel. In SHAPPONJi PALLONJi & CO 423 ITR 220 (BOM) The Court observed"15. From the assessment order, we find that assessing officer had noted that the respondent - assessee had made purchases of Rs.3,23,944.00 and Rs.8,923.00 from M/s. Kant Enterprises and M/s. Nutan Metals respectively. Assessing officer further noted that information was received from the Sale Tax Department, Government o…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7213/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

…cision of High Court of Gujrat in case of KRISHNA TEXTILES 310 ITR 227 (GUJ)holding onus on revenue to prove that the income really belong to assesse. In para 16 referred the fact that all payments were made through banking channel. In SHAPPONJi PALLONJi & CO 423 ITR 220 (BOM) The Court observed"15. From the assessment order, we find that assessing officer had noted that the respondent - assessee had made purchases of Rs.3,23,944.00 and Rs.8,923.00 from M/s. Kant Enterprises and M/s. Nutan Metals respectively. Assessing officer further noted that information was received from the Sale Tax Department, Government o…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 7212/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal JainFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 147

…cision of High Court of Gujrat in case of KRISHNA TEXTILES 310 ITR 227 (GUJ)holding onus on revenue to prove that the income really belong to assesse. In para 16 referred the fact that all payments were made through banking channel. In SHAPPONJi PALLONJi & CO 423 ITR 220 (BOM) The Court observed"15. From the assessment order, we find that assessing officer had noted that the respondent - assessee had made purchases of Rs.3,23,944.00 and Rs.8,923.00 from M/s. Kant Enterprises and M/s. Nutan Metals respectively. Assessing officer further noted that information was received from the Sale Tax Department, Government o…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 926/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ITR 474 (Guj) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Limited – 354 ITR 630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the interest-free funds are lesser than the interest-free advances. The CIT(A) has properly given part relief thereby directing the Assessing Officer to…

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1118/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ITR 474 (Guj) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Limited – 354 ITR 630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the interest-free funds are lesser than the interest-free advances. The CIT(A) has properly given part relief thereby directing the Assessing Officer to…

Tega Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1832/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

Section 10Section 115JSection 144C(5)Section 14A

…hs investment 4 A.Y. 2014-2015 Tega Industries Limited TOTAL Rs.53.37 lakhs Before us, short controversy is in regard to interest disallowance of Rs.11.34 lakhs. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT –vs.- Reliance Utilities & Power Limited (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) has held that “if there were funds available both interest-free and Overdraft and/or loans taken, then the presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest-free funds generated or available with the Company, if the interest-free fund was sufficient to meet the investment and, therefore, no part of interest on the borrowing…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

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

ITA 5318/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2011-12

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…available with the assessee for making investment in tax free securities and it was contended that since investment was out of assessee's own interest free funds, in terms of decision of Jurisdictional High Court in case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 and HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505, no disallowance of interest is warranted. With regard to the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) he contended that assessee itself has offered the amount attributable for earning the exempt income, therefore, further disallowance made by Revenue authorities was not justified. 28. Learned AR also invited our at…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

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

ITA 4835/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2010-11

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…available with the assessee for making investment in tax free securities and it was contended that since investment was out of assessee's own interest free funds, in terms of decision of Jurisdictional High Court in case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 and HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505, no disallowance of interest is warranted. With regard to the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) he contended that assessee itself has offered the amount attributable for earning the exempt income, therefore, further disallowance made by Revenue authorities was not justified. 28. Learned AR also invited our at…

M/S Keventer Agro Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2527/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Section 10(34)Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules as the investments were made out of the own funds of the assessee. In this regard he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340. He also submitted that the dividend income was earned from only one investment i.e. Metro Diary Limited. He further submitted that the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act read with rule 3 M/s. Keventer Agro Limited, AY 2013-14 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules can be made by considering only those investments from which dividend income was earned by placing…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6908/MUM/2012[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

…Rs.449.67 crores during the relevant period. In HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 42 (Bom), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court referring to the decision in CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) held as under : “15. It is clear that for the first time in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra) that this Court took a view 17 Larsen & Toubro Asstt.Yrs 2001-02 & 2001-02 that the presumption which has been laid down in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra) with regard to investment in tax free securities coming out of assessee's own fun…

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

Anil Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-63(1), New Delhi

Anil Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-63(1), New Delhi

A.C.I.T., Circle-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

M/S Salarpuria Properties Pvt Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., CC-3(2), Kolkata

ACIT, Cen, Cir-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

ACIT, Cen.Cir.-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrsteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

M/S. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. ACIT, Kota

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. DCIT, Kota

Niraj Kumar Associates Pvt.Ltd, Pashan vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

Tega Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 12(2), Kolkata

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

M/S Keventer Agro Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-4(1), Kolkata

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(2), Mumbai