How many judgments cite CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.?

2,118 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii), Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 8D, Section 10(34).

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

313 ITR 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 367,842 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 14A Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 115JB Section 8D Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

interest free advances disallowance of interest expenditure section 36(1)(iii)disallowance under section 14a commercial expediency disallowance u/s 14a section 14a book profits section 115j section 36(1)section 36 section 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.

Himalayan Endeavour Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Siliguri

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

ITA 2391/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.2391/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…tion that the investments were purchased out of its own free funds. Therefore the question of disallowance under Rule 8D2(ii) does not arise. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Power Ltd. in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that if there were funds available, both interest free and overdraft which loans Himalayan Endeavour Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2013-14 are taken, then the presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest free funds generated or available with the assessee. If the interest free f…

Express Airtronics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(3), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1402/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1402/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12 बिाम/ Express Airotronics Pvt. Ito 2(1)(3), Mumbai Ltd., (Now Merged With Net Work Telelink Private Ltd.) V. B-14 Valmiki Apartments, Next To Bombay College Of Pharmacy, Sunder Nagar, Kalina, Mumbai 400098 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan: Aaace0826H (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri. D.G. Pansari (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kochar: This Appeal, Filed By Assessee, Being Ita No. 1402/Mum/2016, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 02.12.2015 In Appeal No. Cit(A)-4/It-14/Ito-2(1)(3)/2014-15, Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2011-12, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From The Assessment Order Dated 14.03.2014 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Ay 2011-12. I.T.A. No.1402/Mum/2016

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. D.G. Pansari (DR)

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

…ed its own order for Assessment Year 2002-03. Thus as could be seen from aforesaid judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court , it is purely a question of fact. The decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (2009) 313 ITR 340(Bom.) is relevant. The working of availability of interest bearing funds as well as interest free funds which are mixed use funds being not tied up funds is not available on record in the instant case before us. Under these circumstances based on facts as are emerging from records , we are restoring the matter back to the file of the AO for ascer…

Crystaline Exports Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 3(1)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1377/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Crystaline Exports Pvt. Income Tax Officer, Ltd. C/O. Karnavat & Co. 2A Vs. 3(1)(3), Room No. 666, Kitab Mahal, 1St Floor, 192 6Th Floor, Aayakar Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai- Bhavan, M.K. Road, 400001 Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacc1527F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sunil Hirawat, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27/03/2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/03/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Hirawat, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Abi Rama Kartikiyen, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…be restricted to the investments on which exempt income is received. In this regard reliance is placed by him on the decision in Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra). M/s Crystaline Exports 3 Further, relying on the decision in CIT v. Reliance Utilities Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom), CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom), the Ld. counsel submits that in a case wherein the own fund is more than the investment, the disallowance of interest u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D is unwarranted. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submits that as the assessee has itself revised the working of disallowance u/s 14A to Rs.1,36,864/-, the Ld. CI…

Bga Tradelink Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 2558/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar and Shri Parin Shah, ARsFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14A

…4 was made to the amount of Rs. 42,30,86,521/-. These facts demonstrate that assessee company had sufficient own fund for making investment in the shares. After placing reliance on the decision for Mumbai High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power 313 ITR 340 with regard to investment in tax free securities out of assessee’s own fund and considering the other judicial decisions referred by the assesssee, we are not inclined with the decision of ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the impugned addition made by the assessing officer without giving reason for its justification, therefore, we are of the view that no…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Garware Polyster Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 5757/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhandcit-9(3)(2) M/S Garware Polyster Ltd. 418, 4Th Floor, Garware House, Western Express Aayakar Bhavan, Highway, Vile Parle(East), M.K. Road, Mumbai-400057. Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaacg0571D Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad (Cit-Dr) Respondent By : Shri Apurv Gandhi (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.03.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad (CIT-DR)For Respondent: Shri Apurv Gandhi (AR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…ermore no interest disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act when own funds of the assessee are sufficient to cover the value of investments for this purpose reliance can be placed on the following judicial pronouncement: 1. CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd [313 ITR 340 (80m)] 2. CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd [366 ITR 505 (Bom)] 3. HDFC Bank Vs. DCIT [383 ITR 529 (Bom)] 20. For the purpose of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act only those investments are to be considered form which exempt income has been received during the year for this purpose reliance is placed on following judicial pronouncement: 1. ACIT Vs. Vireet in…

Cil Nova Petrochemicals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1401/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1401/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.N. SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.DR

Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…med as carried from these surplus funds. No notional interest ought to be calculated for capiialization. In order to fortify ourselves, we would like to refer to the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom). In view of the above, this ground of appeal is allowed. " 9. The facts and the circumstances being similar without any material change, we do not see any reason to depart from the view already taken in this regard. In parity with the findings of the co- ordinate bench, we find that merit in the plea of the assessee. The AO is accordingly…

Nav Bharat Roller Flour Mills (P) Ltd., Siliguri vs. ITO, Ward - 1(3), Jalpaiguri

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2125/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm] I.T.A No. 2125/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Nav Bharat Roller V.S I.T.O. Ward 1(3), Jalpaiguri Flour Mills P.Ltd Pan: Aaccn 4807D (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri P.K. Sanghai, Fca, Ld.Ar For The Respondent : Shri C.J. Singh, Jcit, Ld.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Sanghai, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ds amounts to Rs.3.48 crores as against its investments of Rs. 1.18 crores in yielding exempt income. I therefore reject the 2 ITA No. 2125/Kol/2018-SMC Revenue’s arguments in view of hon’ble Bombay high court’s decision in CIT V/s Reliance Utility Power Ltd 313 ITR 314 (Bom) that the necessary presumption in such a case is of utilization of interest free funds only. I therefore delete former disallowance component of Rs. 9,32,733/-. 3. Coming to later administrative expenditure disallowance component of Rs. 59,127/- , I find that the Assessing Officer has rightly calculated the same at 0.5% of average value of…

DCIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. India Fashions Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 6921/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Abhi Rama Kartikeyan-Ld.DRFor Respondent: Jitendra Jain- AR

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…8D(2)(ii) was deleted by observing that own funds were far in excess of the investments made by the assessee. To arrive the said conclusion, strength was drawn from the judgments of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in CIT Vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340] & also in CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [ITA No. 330 of 2012. The expense disallowance u/r 8D(2)(iii) was restricted to Rs.3,325, being exempt income earned by the assessee. Aggrieved by 4 M/s. India Fashions Ltd. Assessment Year :2011-12 the aforesaid relief provided by first appellate authority, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 4. Upon hea…

Vidyut Metallics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle- 38(New Central Circle-6(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5243/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5243/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5244/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Vidyut Metallics Pvt.Ltd. Acit-Cc 38 बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Malhotra House [New Central Circle-6(3) 19Th Floor, Air India Building Opp. Gpo, Fort Vs. Mumbai-400 001. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcv-3305-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha and Shri Dr. Prayag Jha- Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Gobgtra - Ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

…1 ITA No.5243-44/Mum/2017 M/s. Vidyut Metallics Private Limited Assessment Years :2010-11 & 2011-12 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एफ” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी सी. एन. "साद,"ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5243/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5244/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. Vidyut Metallics Pvt.Ltd. ACIT-CC 38 बनाम/ 4th Floor, Malhotra House [New Central Circle-6(3)…

Resurgere Mines & Minerals India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee partly allowed

ITA 6601/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini, J.M. & Shri O.P. Kant, A.M.

For Appellant: Ms. Umang LuthraFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT-DR

…cer to record satisfaction that interest bearing funds used for investment to earn tax free income”. The Honourable Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance 21 ITA.No.6601/Del./2014 Resurgere Mines & Minerals India Ltd., New Delhi. Utility and Power Limited 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) held that “when assessee has sufficient interest free funds, presumption would arise that investment would be out of the interest free funds generated or available to assessee. The interest was deductible.” 17.1. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that assessee made suo motu disallowance under…

Alok Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on the limited aspects of the ground No

ITA 1017/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm M/S. Alok Industries Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Tower B, 2Nd Floor Income Tax, Peninsula Business Park Central Circle-6(2), G.K. Marg, Lower Parel Air India Building, Marine Mumbai – 400 013 Drive, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaaca0201C (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…0.00 0.00 Total 1984.39 2487.06 Advances to subsidiaries 64.08 80.16 / associates 4.4. The ld. AR also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., 7 M/s. Alok Industries reported in 313 ITR 340 and also on the decision of this Tribunal rendered in the case of group concern of assessee Alok Infrastructure Ltd., vs. ACIT in ITA Nos. 818 and 1651/Mum/2012 for A.Y.2008-09 dated 29/07/2016 wherein the facts and the decision rendered thereon are reproduced hereunder:- “9. In so far as cross appeal of the Revenue is concerned, the solitary is…

Rami Devi Ramdas Rice Mill Private Limited, Burdwan vs. ITO, Ward 2(4), Burdwan

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2128/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 40

…to rival contentions. It emerges from the assessee’s evidence on record that its interest fee funds amounted to ₹46.80 lac under share capital and share application heads. Hon'ble Bombay high court’s decision in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) holds that the necessary presumption that arises in such a case is that of utilization of interests free funds only. We accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned interest disallowance of ₹2,79,956/-. 4. Next comes assessee’s second substantive ground challenging sec. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. sec. 194J of the Act on account of…

DCIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Kewal Kiran Enterparises, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 3905/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Vp) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dcit-24(3), M/S Kewal Kiran Enterprises, Room No. 701, C-11, B-101/107, Synthofine Estate, 7Th Floor, B.K.C. Bandra (E)), Opp. Virwani Ind. Estate, Mumbai 400051 Vs. Goregaon (East), Mumbai - 400063 Pan: Aaafk2525L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ayushi Modani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Satish Chandra Rapre (DR)

Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 40A(2)(b)

…the total investment was Rs. 1,50,81,843/-. The Ld. counsel relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC bank Ltd versus DCIT (383 ITR 529) Bom., CIT versus HDFC bank (366 ITR 505) Bom, CIT vs. Reliance utilities and power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) Bom and other cases to substantiate his contention. The learned counsel further pointed out that since the AO had applied rule 8D(2)(iii) without recording his dissatisfaction regarding the assessee’s claim, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D to the suo moto disallowance made by the assesse…

The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Priyal International Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2683/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…he following judgment by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court namely (a) CIT vs GSFC Ltd. 358 ITR 0323(Guj) (b) CIT vs Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Col. Ltd. 221 Taxman 479 (c) CIT vs Raghuvir Synthetics 354 ITR 222. (d) CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 9.1 The fundamental principle highlighted in these judgments, as pointed out by appellant, is that if there are funds available, both interest free and overdraft or loans, then the presumption would arise that the investments would be out of interest free funds available with the appellant, if the interest free funds were sufficient to make such…

Living Media India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 648/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Dr. B. R. R. Kumarliving Media India Ltd. Vs Dcit 9K- Block, Connaught Circle – 15 (2) Circus New Delhi New Delhi - 110005 Pan No.Aaacl0087H

…ntention of the appellant that-in a situation where the own funds are more than the investment in exempt assets, no disallowance can be made out of the interest expenditure. This has been the view of the Bombay High Court in Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340) and HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505). It has most recently been followed by the Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of T&T Motors LTD. (154 ITD 306). Accordingly in my view no disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii) is warranted. 8.2.2 Coming to the issue of disallowance of administrative expenses, the AR has pointed out t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Living Media India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1034/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Dr. B. R. R. Kumarliving Media India Ltd. Vs Dcit 9K- Block, Connaught Circle – 15 (2) Circus New Delhi New Delhi - 110005 Pan No.Aaacl0087H

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S. Jubilant Organosyes Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 4975/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

…nterest free advances / non-business expenses. Such is also mandate of decision of honourable Supreme Court and several honourable high courts in Munjal Sales Corpn. vs. CIT [(2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC)](Para 17) , CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [(2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)](Para 10), CIT v. Tin Box Co. [(2003) 260 ITR 637 (Delhi)] (Para 9) , CIT v. South India Corporation (Agencies) Ltd. [209 CTR 233 (Mad)] (Para 18), CIT v. Prem Heavy Engg. Works (P.) Ltd [285 ITR 554/ 150 Taxman 90 (All.)] (Para 5). In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in order of learned CIT – A. Accordingly, ground number 2 is d…

ACIT, Moradabad vs. M/S Jubliant Organosys Ltd., Uttar Pradesh

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2596/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

Jubilant Organosys Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Moradabad

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2497/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Beena A. Pillai & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R.M. Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri J. K. Mishra, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 43(1)

Vikas Globalone Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 26(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2498/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Piyush KamalFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R

Section 115JSection 37Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “G” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2498/Del./2018 Assessment Year 2012-2013 M/s. Vikas Globalone Ltd., (Now known as M/s. The DCIT, Vikas Ecotech Ltd.,) F-6, vs. Circle-26(2), Vikas House, 34/1, East Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi. New Delhi. PIN 110026.PAN AAACV0608G (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Gautam Jain, And For Assessee : Shri Piyush Kamal, Advocates For Revenue : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT-D.R. Date of Hearing : 31.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.03.2019 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appea…