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.

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

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

ITA 3971/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

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…

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

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

ITA 3215/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…

Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 3214/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

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…

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

ITA 4436/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. Narashimha Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 23(1)

…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. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 4061/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Prashant Maharishi & Sh. K. Narashimha Chary(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dlf Limited Addl. Cit Dlf Centre, (9Th Floor) Vs Range-10 Sansad Marg, 404, C. R. Building New Delhi-110001 New Delhi Pan No.Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit Vs. Dlf Ltd. Circle –7 (1) Sansad Marg New Delhi New Delhi Pan No. Aaacd3494N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 23(1)

…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…

Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt.Ltd., Hyd, Secunderabad vs. ITO, Ward-17(1), Hyd, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1212/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2013-14 (Through Video Conference) Drs Dilip Roadlines Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 17(1), Hyderabad. Pan – Aadcd 1865 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Shri Arvindakshan RS

…terest free advances given to the group concerns were only out of own funds of the assessee and not out of borrowed funds. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 and in the case of HDFC Ltd. reported in 366 ITR 505. Respectfully following the ratio decidendi of the same decision, we hold that there cannot be any disallowance of interest on borrowed capital in the facts and circumstances of the case. Accordingly, grounds Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are allowed. 7. Ground Nos. 3, 4 & 5 relate to empl…

M/S. Ifci Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2473/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

Ifci Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5381/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

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

ITA 2062/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

Ifci Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1984/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

Ifci Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 3443/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

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

ITA 3207/DEL/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

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

ITA 2199/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

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

ITA 1631/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 14Section 143Section 43B

…ielding shares. Assessee further stated that it has not borrowed any new sum during the year and all these investments are old. Assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 wherein it is laid down that the if there were sufficient funds available both interest free and interest-bearing funds, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds available with the assessee company. With respect to the administrative expenditure, it was submitted that for assessment year 2006 – 07 the lea…

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

In the result, cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 1359/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 14Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―C ‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year 2934/Del /2010 2002-03 U/s 143(3) 1359/Del/2011 2002-03 u/s 147 rws 143(3) The Deputy Commissioner of IFCI LIMITED Vs. Income Tax IFCI Towers Circle – 11(1) 61 Nehru Place C R Building New Delhi I P Estate PAN: AAACT0668G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA/ Co No Assessment Year 262 Del 2010 2002-03 In ITA No 2934/Del/2010 123/Del/2011 2002-03 In ITA No 1359 Del 2011 IFCI LIMITED The Deputy Commissioner Vs. IFCI Towers of Income Tax…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ifci, New Delhi

In the result, cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2934/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 10Section 14Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35D

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ―C ‖: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No Assessment Year 2934/Del /2010 2002-03 U/s 143(3) 1359/Del/2011 2002-03 u/s 147 rws 143(3) The Deputy Commissioner of IFCI LIMITED Vs. Income Tax IFCI Towers Circle – 11(1) 61 Nehru Place C R Building New Delhi I P Estate PAN: AAACT0668G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA/ Co No Assessment Year 262 Del 2010 2002-03 In ITA No 2934/Del/2010 123/Del/2011 2002-03 In ITA No 1359 Del 2011 IFCI LIMITED The Deputy Commissioner Vs. IFCI Towers of Income Tax…

Unitech Marketing Services, Mumbai vs. ACIT - Circle -17 (3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5254/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhm/S Unitech Marketing Services, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 511, Plot No. 15, Raheja Plaza, Circle-17(3), Co. Soc. Ltd. Veera Desai Road, Aayakar Bhavan, 1St Floor, Vs. Shah Industrial Estate, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 053

For Appellant: Shri V. P. Kothari, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Padma Ram Mirdha, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…n favour of the Assessee. In this regard, the submission of Mr Mistry, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assessee, that this issue is squarely covered by a judgment of this Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340/178 Taxman 135 (Bom.) is well founded. The facts of that case were that the Assessee viz. M/s Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. had invested certain amounts in Reliance Gas Ltd. and Reliance Strategic Investments Ltd. It was the case of the Assessee that they themselves were in the business of generation of power and they had earned regular busin…

Sundaram Business Services Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 6 (3), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 1736/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kocharheard Through Video Conferencing

For Appellant: Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan,Addl.CITFor Respondent: 19.08.2020
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…1961 Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the 1962 Rules is not sustainable in the eyes of law which we :- 8 -: order deletion. Our decision is supported by decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (2009) 313 ITR 340(Bom.) ; Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Limited v. DCIT reported in (2016) 383 ITR 529(Bom); Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Limited reported in (2019) 102 taxmann.com 52(SC) and dismissal of SLP in the case of PCIT v. Sintex Industries Limited reported in (2018)93 taxmann.com 24 (SC…

ACIT, Circle - 5(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Hindusthan National Glass & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1467/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Justice P.P. Bhatt & Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 134ASection 14A

…d no interest bearing borrowed funds were utilized for making such investment. In support of this contention, the ld. Counsel for the asesese relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Limited reported in 313 ITR 340 as well as in the case of CIT –vs.- HDFC Bank Limited reported in 383 ITR 529. 9. As regards the relief allowed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) by restricting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A on account of common administrative expenses by applying Rule 8D(2)(iii) to the extent of exempt dividend income actually earned by…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Cornerstone Property Investments Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 1083/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. V. Sreenivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra. CIT DR
Section 14A

…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 ITA No. 1082 & 1083/Bang/2019 Page 9 of 11 company, if the interest-free funds were sufficien…