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 367,518 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.

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 795/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 671/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hydeabad, Hyderabad

ITA 636/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad vs. Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 31/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

ITA 2132/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

Associated Broadcasting Co. Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-13(1), Hyderabad

ITA 1752/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P.Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Bharadwaj, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s own funds being the share capital and reserves were much more than the investments made by the assessee in its subsidiaries. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., (2009) [178 135/313 ITR 340] (Bombay HC), wherein it was held that – “if the funds are available, both interest free and/or loans taken, just presumption would arise that investments would be out of interest free funds generated or available with company, provided such funds are sufficient to meet the investments”. He submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of…

M/S Pme Infratech (P) Ltd., Thane vs. ACIT, Palghar Circle, Palghar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3151/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3151/मुं/2019 ("न.व.2015-16) M/S.Pme Infratech (P) Ltd., Plot No.51, Near Bidco & Golden Industries Mahim, Palghar, Thane 401 404 : अपीलाथ"/ Appellant Pan: Aaacv4958R बनाम/ Vs.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita P. Kaushik
Section 143Section 36(1)(iii)

…e with law. The Assessing Officer while deciding the issue afresh shall also test the alleged interest free advances on the touchstones of ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited reported as 313 ITR 340. The ground No.2 is allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In ground No.3 of the appeal, the assessee has assailed disallowance of vehicle running and maintenance expenses confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee has claimed vehicle running and maintenance expenses amounting to Rs.5,70,459/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire expenditure on…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-14(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Citicorp Finance (I) Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4471/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax V. M/S. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd., Circle - 14(1)(2) 5Th Floor, Plot C-61 Room No. 475, 4Th Floor Bandra Kurla Complex, G-Block Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 079 Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabca3223B (Appellant) (Respondent) Co.No. 172/Mum/2019 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 4471/Mum/2018 (A.Y: 2012-13)] M/S. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd., V. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax 5Th Floor, Plot C-61 Circle - 14(1)(2), Bandra Kurla Complex, G-Block Room No. 475, 4Th Floor Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 079 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai – 400 020 Pan: Aabca3223B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal
Section 115JSection 14A

…rders of the authorities below. In so far as, interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of I.T Rules is concerned, we find that Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340] and CIT v. HDFC Bank [49 taxmann.com 335] deleted the disallowance as the assessee has its own interest free funds by way of share capital reserves and surplus, far in excess of the investments made by it in equity shares which got yielded exempt income. 3 CO.NO. 172/MUM/2019 M/s. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd., We do not find any infirmity in t…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4793/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…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…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4187/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. N. Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dlf Limited Jcit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 80I

…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…

M/S Aarkay Investments Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2091/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Sept 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2016-17

Section 14Section 14A

…ssessing Officer disallowing a part of interest payments under section 14A of the Act ( read with rule 8D(2)(ii) of I.T Rules, 1962 ) needs to be set aside”. We note that Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340(Bom HC) and in the cases of East India Pharmaceutical Works 224 ITR 627 (SC) & Woolcombers 134 ITR 219 (Cal) have laid the proposition of law that when there are both interest free funds and interest bearing funds, the presumption is that interest free funds were utilized for interest free investment and advances. Thus, we note that factual matri…

Vedanta Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle- 26(2), New Delhi

ITA 12/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: FixedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anupam Kant Garg, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153

…as made investments out of his own funds. Even assuming that the investments have come out of pool of funds, that is own funds and borrowed funds, then, the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 squarely apply on the facts of the case, as in that case, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that if the investments are made from pool of funds, then presumption would be that investments have come out of own funds if own funds are in excess of investment. 43. It is also not in dispute that the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in earlier…

ACIT- 29 (1), Mumbai vs. Jagdish Thakkar, Mumbai

In the result, the first ground of appeal by the revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5474/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah (AR)For Respondent: Smt. Samatha (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…st free funds available with the assessee at the beginning of the year was Rs.1,63,74,285/- whereas the interest free advance was Rs.94,18,505/- Therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Limited 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the above disallowances of Rs. 13,08,770/-. We find that the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly followed the decision in Reliance Utilities & Power Limited (supra), as the interest free funds 8 ITA No. 5474/M/2018 & CO.NO.184/M/2019 Shri Jagdish Thakkar available with the assessee at the beginning of the year was much more then…

Ravi Mohan Gehi, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

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

ITA 6238/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6238/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit Cen Cir 40, Ravi Mohan Gehi, Piramal Chambers B/6, Navkar Chambers, बिधम/ Mumbai Andheri Kurla Road, Vs. Pin- Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 059 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan No. Aeppg1674M (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant : Shri Pradip Kanasi, Ar By प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Michael, Dr Virtual Date Of Hearing 29.07.2020 : Date Of Pronouncement 16.09.2020 :

For Appellant: Shri Pradip Kanasi, AR byFor Respondent: Shri Michael, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153ASection 234BSection 57

…) [A.Y.2008- 091 b; Mohan Exports, 138 ITD 108 (Delhi) [A.Y.2008-09] Delite Enterp--ise, 135 'TTJ 663(Mum) [A.Y.2003-04] d) BNP Paribas SA, 32 twunann.com 276 (Bombay) (2013) e) GIDC Ltd (Gujarat) 37 taxmann.com 254 (2013) [A.Y.2004-05] f) Reliance Utilities, 313 ITR 340 (Born.) [A.Y.1999-00] g) UTI Bank Ltd. 32 taxrnann.com 370 (Gujarat) (2013) [A.Y.2003-04] h) Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. 33 ta.xmann.com 155 (Amritsar) i) Bunge Agribusiness (India) (P.) Ltd. 142 'ITJ 817 (Mum). j) Shoppers Stop Ltd No.1448 & 4475/Mum/2010 dt 30.08.2011. 6. Expenditure debited to Profit & Loss Account was wholly incurred for earnin…

Shri Kedar Prasad Khandelwal, Tonk vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

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

ITA 878/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh jes'k lh 'kekZ] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 878/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2013-14 Shri Kedar Prasad Khandelwal, cuke D.C.I.T., Vs. Prop.-M/s Shri Ram Traders, Circle-7, Newai, Distt. Tonk. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ACRPK 8777 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by :…

Harsh Estates Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT - CC- 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6957/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Dharmesh Shah (AR)For Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel Special Counsel
Section 14ASection 234ASection 254(1)

…nds in its kitty as is prevalent in the balance sheet and hence, there cannot be any disallowance of interest on that count itself. Reliance in this regard is placed on Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom). Hence, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disallowance of interest in the sum of Rs.2,19,69,050/-. Accordingly, the ground No.1 raised by the assessee is allowed.” 11. Considering the consistent decision of the Tribunal and respectfully following the same, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the interest expenses to the assessee. So…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2652/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…1 ITA No. 2428, 2652 & 2429/Del/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (RESPONDENT) AAACS0447A (APPELLANT) DCIT Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (APPELLANT) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi AAACS0447A (RESPONDENT) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. DCIT 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2429/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…1 ITA No. 2428, 2652 & 2429/Del/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (RESPONDENT) AAACS0447A (APPELLANT) DCIT Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (APPELLANT) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi AAACS0447A (RESPONDENT) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. DCIT 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2428/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…1 ITA No. 2428, 2652 & 2429/Del/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. CIT(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (RESPONDENT) AAACS0447A (APPELLANT) DCIT Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (APPELLANT) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi AAACS0447A (RESPONDENT) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. DCIT 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 3972/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3214/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3215/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of Unit 301, To 305, 3 Rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [Now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner Of Income – Mumbai-400 098 Tax, Range 16(1)] Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aagcs9294M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3971/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3972/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Sky Ltd. Income Tax 7(3) 34D Floor, C-1, Wadia 6Th Room No. 615, Floor, International Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Bombay Dyeing), Mumbai-400 020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbi-400 025 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Senior Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29-07-2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-09-2020

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy
Section 143(3)Section 40

…the amount of investment into Capital WIP. Hence, it was argued that no interest bearing funds have been utilized for the purpose of making an investment in Capital WIP. The decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Limited (313 ITR 340) also proceeds on the footing that the cash flow of the relevant year should be considered vis-ã-vis investment made in that year. In response to the said ground, the Bench had requested for a reason for receipt of share capital. In this connection, Ld Counsel for the assessee argued that there is no requirement set out in law to specify the reas…