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.

M/S. Sri Vishnu Shankar Mills Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. ITO, Corp Ward 1, Madurai

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee in ITA No

ITA 577/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा'रण वष' /Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. A.R.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…/2014 Total of fresh 8,00,75,100 8,00,75,100 investment made during the year The assessee has also relied upon following decisions , as under: a) CIT Vs Reliance Industries Ltd (2019) 102 taxmann.com 52(SC) b) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) c) ACIT v. Apollo Hospitals Enterprises Limited (2012) 139 ITD 594 (Chennai) d) CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd (2011) 331 ITR 502 (Del.) :- 7 -: It was submitted that the assessee has received dividend income of Rs. 40.62 lakhs which was claimed as an exempt income , during the year under consideration. The prayers were made by learned…

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. Darashaw & Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 660/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarsl.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak
Section 115JSection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 456/Mum/2012 2008-09 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Flat No. 03, Rajesh Mumbai. Mansion, D. Vachha Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 20 2 660/Mum/2012 2008-09 Dy. CIT, Darashaw & Range 4(1), Company Pvt., Mumbai. Ltd, Mumbai - 20 3 225/Mum/2011 2007-08 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Mumbai - 20 Mumbai. 4 299/Mum/2011 2007-08 Dy. CIT, Range Darashaw & 4(1), Mumbai. Company Pvt., Ltd, Mumbai - 20 "थायी ले…

Darashaw & Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 456/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarsl.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak
Section 115JSection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 456/Mum/2012 2008-09 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Flat No. 03, Rajesh Mumbai. Mansion, D. Vachha Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 20 2 660/Mum/2012 2008-09 Dy. CIT, Darashaw & Range 4(1), Company Pvt., Mumbai. Ltd, Mumbai - 20 3 225/Mum/2011 2007-08 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Mumbai - 20 Mumbai. 4 299/Mum/2011 2007-08 Dy. CIT, Range Darashaw & 4(1), Mumbai. Company Pvt., Ltd, Mumbai - 20 "थायी ले…

Supama Commodities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 229/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarsl.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak
Section 115JSection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 456/Mum/2012 2008-09 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Flat No. 03, Rajesh Mumbai. Mansion, D. Vachha Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 20 2 660/Mum/2012 2008-09 Dy. CIT, Darashaw & Range 4(1), Company Pvt., Mumbai. Ltd, Mumbai - 20 3 225/Mum/2011 2007-08 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Mumbai - 20 Mumbai. 4 299/Mum/2011 2007-08 Dy. CIT, Range Darashaw & 4(1), Mumbai. Company Pvt., Ltd, Mumbai - 20 "थायी ले…

Darashaw & Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 225/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarsl.

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Jyothilakshmi Nayak
Section 115JSection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sl. ITA No. A.Y Appellant Respondent No. 1 456/Mum/2012 2008-09 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Flat No. 03, Rajesh Mumbai. Mansion, D. Vachha Road, Churchgate, Mumbai - 20 2 660/Mum/2012 2008-09 Dy. CIT, Darashaw & Range 4(1), Company Pvt., Mumbai. Ltd, Mumbai - 20 3 225/Mum/2011 2007-08 Darashaw & Dy. CIT, Company Pvt., Ltd, Range 4(1), Mumbai - 20 Mumbai. 4 299/Mum/2011 2007-08 Dy. CIT, Range Darashaw & 4(1), Mumbai. Company Pvt., Ltd, Mumbai - 20 "थायी ले…

DCIT - 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5659/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rifaur Rahmandy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 14(2)(1) Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400 021 ...... Appellant

For Appellant: S/Shri F.V.Irani / Chetan KakkaFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Singh Jangpangi
Section 14ASection 36

…ere under:- “1. Whether on the facts of the instant case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.6,59,63,725/- without appreciating the fact that decision of Hon'ble High Court in the case of C1T Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) was rendered prior to introduction of Rule 8D and in that case the issue was regarding disallowance of interest u/s.36(l)(iii) and not 14A and assessee had made non-current investment of Rs.100.48 crore. The Ld.CIT(A) further erred in not considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Maxopp Investments Pvt. Ltd.…

Kotak Mahindra Prime Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT (Hq) (Judl) to the Pr. CIT . 14, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5603/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Rifaur Rahmandy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 14(2)(1) Room No.432, 4Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai- 400 021 ...... Appellant

For Appellant: S/Shri F.V.Irani / Chetan KakkaFor Respondent: Shri Narendra Singh Jangpangi
Section 14ASection 36

…ere under:- “1. Whether on the facts of the instant case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.6,59,63,725/- without appreciating the fact that decision of Hon'ble High Court in the case of C1T Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) was rendered prior to introduction of Rule 8D and in that case the issue was regarding disallowance of interest u/s.36(l)(iii) and not 14A and assessee had made non-current investment of Rs.100.48 crore. The Ld.CIT(A) further erred in not considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Maxopp Investments Pvt. Ltd.…

Mafatlal Fabrics P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7431/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjit Singhmafatlal Fabrics P Ltd., Dy Cit 1(2), Mafatlal House, Mumbai Vs. Backbay Reclamation, Mumbai 400 020 Pan Aaacp4133C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Dropsingh Meena
Section 14A

…own and interest free funds available. The case of the assessee is squarely supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and CIT vs. Reliance Utilities And Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom), wherein it has been held that no disallowance has to be made towards interest expenditure where assessee’s own interest free funds are available for investment in securities. We, therefore, respectfully following the ratio of the decisions laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete…

Ramgopal Textiles Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 3(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5384/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Jyoti Lakshmi Nayak-Ld.DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…investments made by the assessee was established, interest disallowance would not be justified. Reliance was placed on the binding decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd. (49 Taxmann.com 335) & Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) for the submissions that a presumption was to be drawn in assessee’s favor that the investments were out of free funds available with the assessee. The Ld. AR also raised a plea that for the purpose of disallowance, only those investments were to be considered which actually yielded any exempt income during the year. Lastly, Ld. AR assailed adju…

Ramgopal Textiles Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- 3(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5383/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Jyoti Lakshmi Nayak-Ld.DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…investments made by the assessee was established, interest disallowance would not be justified. Reliance was placed on the binding decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd. (49 Taxmann.com 335) & Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) for the submissions that a presumption was to be drawn in assessee’s favor that the investments were out of free funds available with the assessee. The Ld. AR also raised a plea that for the purpose of disallowance, only those investments were to be considered which actually yielded any exempt income during the year. Lastly, Ld. AR assailed adju…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1557/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rns for business activities on commercial expediency. Further the advances are out of surplus funds available with the assessee and supported his arguments with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 430 (Bom) , and the presumption that, advances are made out of surplus funds. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Golf View Homes Limited 394 ITR 540 (Kar) for advances provided to the sister concerns on commercial expediency. And in assessee own case, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal fo…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 582/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rns for business activities on commercial expediency. Further the advances are out of surplus funds available with the assessee and supported his arguments with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 430 (Bom) , and the presumption that, advances are made out of surplus funds. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Golf View Homes Limited 394 ITR 540 (Kar) for advances provided to the sister concerns on commercial expediency. And in assessee own case, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal fo…

Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 439/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rns for business activities on commercial expediency. Further the advances are out of surplus funds available with the assessee and supported his arguments with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 430 (Bom) , and the presumption that, advances are made out of surplus funds. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Golf View Homes Limited 394 ITR 540 (Kar) for advances provided to the sister concerns on commercial expediency. And in assessee own case, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal fo…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gokaldas Images Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 77/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rns for business activities on commercial expediency. Further the advances are out of surplus funds available with the assessee and supported his arguments with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 430 (Bom) , and the presumption that, advances are made out of surplus funds. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Golf View Homes Limited 394 ITR 540 (Kar) for advances provided to the sister concerns on commercial expediency. And in assessee own case, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal fo…

Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1502/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No. / C.O. Appellant Respondent No. & Asst. Year 77/Bang/2015 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2010-11 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 Pan Aaacg6637Q C.O. M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of No.82/Bang/2015 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd (In It(Tp)A 3(1)(2), Bangalore. No.77/Bang/2015) Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 439/Bang/2016 -Do- -Do- 2011-12 582/Bang/2016 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2011-12 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1502/Bang/2014 M/S. Gokaldas Images Pvt. Dy. Commissioner Of 2009-10 Ltd., Income Tax, Circle 11(3), 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Bangalore. Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022 1557/Bang/2014 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Gokaldas Images 2009-10 Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore. Pvt. Ltd., 7 & 12, Indl. Suburb, 2Nd Stage, Yeshwanthpur, Bangalore-560 022

For Appellant: Shri Sathyanarayana Murthi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 10BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…rns for business activities on commercial expediency. Further the advances are out of surplus funds available with the assessee and supported his arguments with the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 430 (Bom) , and the presumption that, advances are made out of surplus funds. The Ld. AR also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Golf View Homes Limited 394 ITR 540 (Kar) for advances provided to the sister concerns on commercial expediency. And in assessee own case, the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal fo…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री जी. मिंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank of India The Dy. Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./PAN No. AAACS8577K आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 4563/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessmen…

Nhavasheva International Container Terminal P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3364/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Girish DaveFor Respondent: Ms. Amrita Ranjan, DR
Section 115J

…funds and hence no disallowance for interest is to be done under Section 14A of the Act. This claim is supported by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). We find this submission is also cogent. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the aforesaid case has duly accepted that no disallowance for interest is to be done under Section 14A of the Act if assessee is having sufficient interest free funds available with it. It was also expounded that assessee was not required to bring out a one-to-on…

Nhava Sheva International Container Terminal P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 705/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Girish DaveFor Respondent: Ms. Amrita Ranjan, DR
Section 115J

…funds and hence no disallowance for interest is to be done under Section 14A of the Act. This claim is supported by Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). We find this submission is also cogent. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the aforesaid case has duly accepted that no disallowance for interest is to be done under Section 14A of the Act if assessee is having sufficient interest free funds available with it. It was also expounded that assessee was not required to bring out a one-to-on…

DCIT - Circle -11(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tops Securities Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue and the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3445/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 The D.C.I.T, Circle – 11(3)(1), M/S Tops Security Ltd., Room No. 204, Aayakar Bhavan, 5, Royal Palm Golf Country Club, 2Nd Floor, M.K. Marg, Survey # 169, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Aarey Milk Colony , Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400065 Pan: Aaact0160F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 136/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3445/Mum/2018) Assessment Year: 2011-2012 M/S Topsgrup Service (I) Ltd., The D.C.I.T, Circle – 11(3)(1), (Formerly Known As Tops Security 2Nd Floor, Room No. 204, Ltd.), Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 5, Royal Palm Golf Country Club, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Survey 169, Aarey Milk Colony, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400065 Pan: Aaact0160F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-2013 The D.C.I.T, Circle – 11(3)(1), M/S Tops Security Ltd., Room No. 204, Aayakar Bhavan, 5, Royal Palm Golf Country Club, 2Nd Floor, M.K. Marg, Survey 169, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Aarey Milk Colony, Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400065 Pan: Aaact0160F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 14A

…. 89.95 Lakhs Surplus Rs. 3846.97 Lakhs 7.3.7 Since the own funds are more than investments and loans the presumption is that loans have been advanced by using the own funds only as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities, 313 ITR 340. 12 ITA Nos. 3445 - 3448/MUM/2018 & CO 136-139/MUM/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 7.3.8 It is also pertinent to note that the working capital loan and vehicle loans have been used only for business as is evident from Note 10 of Schedule 16 to balance sheet. 7.3.9 Besides, all the loans were advanced to subsidiary com…

DCIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and C

ITA 5689/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumarshri Ram Lal Negi & Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Niraj Sheth and Shri Jayesh Desai, ARsFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunathan Swami, CIT-DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Assessment Year: 2010-11 TATA CAPITAL LTD. ACIT-2(3), Mumbai One Forbes, Dr. B.V. R.NO.552, 5th Floor, Gandhi Marg, Fort, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai, Maharashtra, Mumbai-400020. 400001. PAN: AADCP9147P (Assessee) (Revenue) & Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT-2(3), Mumbai One Forbes, Dr. B.V. Vs. Gandhi Marg, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400001. PAN: AADCP9147P (Revenue) (Assessee) & CO No.122/Mum/2015 (ITA No.2178/Mum/2014) Assessment Year: 2010-11 TATA CAPITAL LTD. DC…