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 366,470 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.

Raajratna Energy Holdings Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 1184/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Ramesh Babu, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Swaroop Manava, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 14ASection 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

…ssioner of Income-tax-IV, Ahmadabad Vs. Sintex Industries Ltd. (2018) 93 taxmann.com 24/255 TAXMAN 171 (S. C) b) CIT-2, Mumbai Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd (2014) 49 taxmann.com 335 (Bombay H C). c) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Reliance utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 178 Taxmann 135 (Bombay HC). d) Principal Commissioner of Income-tax -7 Vs. Premier Finance and Trading Co. Ltd (2019) 262 TAXMAN 341/104 taxmann.com 97 (Bombay). e) Commissioner of Income-tax, Faridabad Vs. NHPC Ltd. (2019) 110 taxmann.com 461 (Punjab and Haryana) f) Roca Bathroom products (P.) Ltd. Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai (2019) 2…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3103/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R.A Dhyani, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…e sufficient to meets its investment. Hence, it could be presumed that the investments were made from the interest-free funds available with the assessee. Reliance was also placed on the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom), South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) as well. 11. We have carefully considered all the relevant facts of the case, rival submissions, provisions of the law and legal position emerging from the above cited decisions of various courts of law including those of hon'ble Supreme Court. We find that the Reserves etc. in the form s…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 3(3), Mumbai vs. Phulchand Exports Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3102/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R.A Dhyani, (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…e sufficient to meets its investment. Hence, it could be presumed that the investments were made from the interest-free funds available with the assessee. Reliance was also placed on the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom), South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) as well. 11. We have carefully considered all the relevant facts of the case, rival submissions, provisions of the law and legal position emerging from the above cited decisions of various courts of law including those of hon'ble Supreme Court. We find that the Reserves etc. in the form s…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(3), Mumbai vs. Prateek Apparels Private Limited, Karnataka

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3099/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ance of interest in case of own funds being higher to interest free loans advanced is approved by P&H High Court and decision relied by Ld. AO stands overruled. The High Court of Bombay considered a similar issue in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom). In this case, the assessee advanced certain funds interest free to sister concerns. If there are funds available both, interest-free and over draft and/or loans are 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 are sufficien…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(3), Mumbai vs. Prateek Apparels Private Limited, Karnataka

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2936/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish KumarFor Respondent: Shri R A Dhyani, (CIT DR)
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ance of interest in case of own funds being higher to interest free loans advanced is approved by P&H High Court and decision relied by Ld. AO stands overruled. The High Court of Bombay considered a similar issue in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom). In this case, the assessee advanced certain funds interest free to sister concerns. If there are funds available both, interest-free and over draft and/or loans are 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 are sufficien…

Phulchand Exports Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2415/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Respondent byFor Respondent: Shri Shankarlal Jain & Shri Satish Kumar
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…e sufficient to meets its investment. Hence, it could be presumed that the investments were made from the interest-free funds available with the assessee. Reliance was also placed on the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom), South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) as well. 11. We have carefully considered all the relevant facts of the case, rival submissions, provisions of the law and legal position emerging from the above cited decisions of various courts of law including those of hon'ble Supreme Court. We find that the Reserves etc. in the form s…

Alpesh Navinchandra Gosalia, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 27(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4128/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2012-13 Alpesh Navinchandra Gosalia, Acit, Circle 27(1), G-202, Kukreja Palace, Vallabh, It-Office, Vashi Railway Station Vs. Baug Lane, Rajawadi Building Navi Mumbai-400703. Mumbai-400077. Pan No. Agbpg 9487 G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Aditya M. Rai, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Mr. Aditya Ramachandran
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 50CSection 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Alpesh Navinchandra Gosalia, ACIT, Circle 27(1), G-202, Kukreja Palace, Vallabh, IT-office, Vashi Railway Station Vs. Baug Lane, Rajawadi Building Navi Mumbai-400703. Mumbai-400077. PAN NO. AGBPG 9487 G Appellant Respondent : Mr. Aditya Ramachandran Assessee by : Mr. Aditya M. Rai, Sr. DR Revenue by Date of Hearing : 29/07/2025 : 31/07/2025 Date of pronouncement ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal has been preferred by the a…

Niket Ramesh Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Central Circle -1 Thane, Mumbai

ITA 4958/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Mr. Niket Ramesh Shah Acit Central Circle 401, Radheshayam Chsl 1, Thane Vishnu Nagar, Naupada Vs. Thane West-400 602. Pan : Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali AafaquiFor Respondent: Shri Subodh Ratnaparakhi
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ffence or which is prohibited by law. 3. The Ld. AR of the appellant also relied on several decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) and CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and also on the same issue Hon'ble Bombay ITAT in the case of • Ramesh Velji Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4959/Mum/2024 dated 5.6.2025 • Mansukh Velji Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4960/Mum/2024 dated 5.6.2025 • Jenish Mansukh Shah Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 4961/Mum/2024 dated 1.1.2025 • Sachin Chandru Mirani Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 5014/Mum/2024 dated 21.11.2024 3…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Vadodara, Race Course vs. Unimed Technologies Limited, Halol

ITA 632/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…mount of own funds exceeds the investments, a presumption arises that the investments are made out of the own funds. For this proposition, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [(2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom)], as well as several subsequent decisions affirming the same legal principle, including HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT [(2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom)] and PCIT v. Midday Multimedia Ltd. [(2018) 89 taxmann.com 184 (Bom)]. The CIT(A) also took note of the decisions of various coordinate benches of the Tribunal and observed that in view of the adequacy of…

Unimed Technologies Limited, Panchmahal vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

ITA 623/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Unimed Technologies Limited Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Survey No.22 & 22, Vs. Vadodara. Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B Asstt.Year : 2016-17 Acit, Cir.2(1)(1) Unimed Technologies Limited Vadodara. Vs. Survey No.22 & 22, Baska, Ujeti Halol Panchmahal Pan : Aaace 4022 B (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Bandish Soparkar, Ar Assessee By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Sher Singh, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…mount of own funds exceeds the investments, a presumption arises that the investments are made out of the own funds. For this proposition, reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [(2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom)], as well as several subsequent decisions affirming the same legal principle, including HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT [(2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom)] and PCIT v. Midday Multimedia Ltd. [(2018) 89 taxmann.com 184 (Bom)]. The CIT(A) also took note of the decisions of various coordinate benches of the Tribunal and observed that in view of the adequacy of…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1050/CHANDI/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…4 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year 2011-12. The written submissions of the ld. CIT DR read as…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1015/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…4 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year 2011-12. The written submissions of the ld. CIT DR read as…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1014/CHANDI/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…4 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year 2011-12. The written submissions of the ld. CIT DR read as…

DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Rana Polycot Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1013/CHANDI/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1050/Chd/2018 &

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…4 (P&H.) d) CIT Vs Max India Ltd. 398 ITR 209 (Pb.) e) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) f) Gordrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd Vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) g) CIT Vs Reliance Ind Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) h) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd 313 ITR 340-344 (Bom) i) CIT V/s Shapoorji Pallongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 3.1 On the other hand, ld. CIT DR filed written submissions and also placed on record copies of re-assessment order in the case of M/s Rana Sugar Ltd. For assessment year 2011-12. The written submissions of the ld. CIT DR read as…

Nagreeka Foils Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3, Kolkata

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs

ITA 1930/KOL/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36

…ses that interest-free advances are made out of own funds, especially when such funds are sufficient to cover the advances. This legal position has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of: • CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) Page 8 of 11 I.T.A. Nos.: 1788, 1930 & 1789/KOL/2024 AYs: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 Nagreeka Foils Ltd. “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 interest free funds generated or available with the company." Further support may be dra…

Nagreeka Foils Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee for AYs

ITA 1788/KOL/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36

…ses that interest-free advances are made out of own funds, especially when such funds are sufficient to cover the advances. This legal position has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of: • CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) Page 8 of 11 I.T.A. Nos.: 1788, 1930 & 1789/KOL/2024 AYs: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 Nagreeka Foils Ltd. “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 interest free funds generated or available with the company." Further support may be dra…

DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Indusind Bank Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the Income Tax Appeal is

ITA 3675/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Kalpexh Unadkat &For Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…on the order passed by his predecessor for the A.Y. 2013-14 dated 06/11/2017 and by placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) deleted the disallowance of interest made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules. The ld. CIT(A) however upheld the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. With regard to yet another submission made by the assessee that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admitted…

Indusind Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT-2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the Income Tax Appeal is

ITA 1842/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 36(1)(via)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…on the order passed by his predecessor for the A.Y. 2013-14 dated 06/11/2017 and by placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) deleted the disallowance of interest made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules. The ld. CIT(A) however upheld the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. With regard to yet another submission made by the assessee that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act per se could not be made in the instant case as the investments were admitted…

Epack Polymers Private Limited, Gautam Budh Nagar vs. ACIT Circle-8(2), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 3403/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

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

…t the above loan advanced to the sister concern totaling to Rs.16.40 crores hereinabove. This clinching facts and figures have gone unrebutted from the Revenue side. 2 | P a g e 5. We thus conclude in light of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) as well as South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1 (SC) that necessary presumption which would arise in such an instance would be that of advancement of interest free funds only to the assessee’s sister concern. We thus find no reason to sustain the impugned section 36(1)(iii) disallowance of Rs.90,20,116/- which is directed to be d…

ACIT, Ltu-2, Chennai vs. Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2618/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ing 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 also note that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 has 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. Such a proposition of law has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in [2019] 410…