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 367,515 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. Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata vs. Addl.CIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 2170/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…t would be presumed that the investment made by the assesse would be out of interest free funds available with the assesse. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd, reported in (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), wherein it was held that if there are funds available both, interest free and overdraft and/or loans are taken, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest- free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds are sufficient to meet the investments. Similar stand was taken by the Hon’ble…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 2160/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…t would be presumed that the investment made by the assesse would be out of interest free funds available with the assesse. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd, reported in (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), wherein it was held that if there are funds available both, interest free and overdraft and/or loans are taken, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest- free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds are sufficient to meet the investments. Similar stand was taken by the Hon’ble…

DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for the A

ITA 2159/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit Biswas, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…t would be presumed that the investment made by the assesse would be out of interest free funds available with the assesse. For that we rely on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd, reported in (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), wherein it was held that if there are funds available both, interest free and overdraft and/or loans are taken, then a presumption would arise that investment would be out of interest- free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds are sufficient to meet the investments. Similar stand was taken by the Hon’ble…

ACIT, C-6, Ludhiana vs. Majestic Hotels Ltd., Ludhiana

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 171/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Jagdeep Goel, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Khera, CA
Section 14ASection 250

…d was diverted as non interest bearing funds. Thus, advances made are much below the interest free funds available with the appellant in the form of capital and reserves and surplus. It is held by Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 that if funds are available, both interest free and interest bearing, then a pre assumption arise that investments are made out of interest bearing funds generated or available with the assessee. If the interest free funds were sufficient to meet investment, no disallowance of interest is warranted. Respectfully, following the ratio of Hon'ble Mu…

Hemraj Shankarlal Mundada, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 1066/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Vp & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Vipin K. GujarathiFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg

…e Sheet at page 5 of the paper book would show that own funds of the assessee are much more than the loans and advances given by assessee to sister concerns/relatives. Hence, no disallowance is called for in the light of decision by the Hon'ble reported as 313 ITR 340. 2.1 The ld. AR submitted that during assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer further made additions on following counts: - Commission on sale of flats Rs. 21,65,596/- - Bank finance charges and interest Rs.1,42,31,004/- - Flat cancellation compensation Rs. 5,39,002/- Total Rs.1,69,35,602/- 3 A.Y.2011-12 The ld. AR submitted that though…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Jsl Ltd., Hisar

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 4110/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…d funds:  Indian Explosives Ltd. vs CIT: 147 ITR 392 (Cal.)  Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT: 134 ITR 219 (Cal.) - approved by Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT: 224 ITR 627  CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)  CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) While following the ratio emanating from the aforesaid decisions, it has been held that interest expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 14A of the Act, where the appellant had sufficient surplus funds and there was no finding by the assessing officer of any…

Jindal Stainless Ltd., Hisar vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the learned AO for 2007 – 08 is dismissed

ITA 6337/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Parnav, Sr. DR
Section 92CSection 92C(2)

…d funds:  Indian Explosives Ltd. vs CIT: 147 ITR 392 (Cal.)  Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT: 134 ITR 219 (Cal.) - approved by Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT: 224 ITR 627  CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom.)  CIT vs. M/s. Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. No.2985 of 2009 (Bom) While following the ratio emanating from the aforesaid decisions, it has been held that interest expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 14A of the Act, where the appellant had sufficient surplus funds and there was no finding by the assessing officer of any…

The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Baroda vs. M/S. Inox Leisure Ltd., Vadodara

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 142/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2018AY 2010-11
Section 143Section 14A

…med as carried from these surplus funds. No notional interest ought to be calculated for capitalization. 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.” 12. The factual position about interest free funds being far from excess of the funds deployed in the new projects and absence of any factual findings about the diversion of funds is not even disputed by the learned Departmental Representative. In these circumstances, in our conside…

Inox Leisure Ltd., Baroda vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 3475/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Nov 2018AY 2010-11
Section 143Section 14A

…med as carried from these surplus funds. No notional interest ought to be calculated for capitalization. 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.” 12. The factual position about interest free funds being far from excess of the funds deployed in the new projects and absence of any factual findings about the diversion of funds is not even disputed by the learned Departmental Representative. In these circumstances, in our conside…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/A. Khaitan India Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 461/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 461/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dcit, Circle-11(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Khaitan India Ltd. [Pan: Aabck 2326 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 10(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITAT); (c) Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Dy, CIT [2005] 921TD 119(Delhi ITAT); (d) ITO v, Strides Arcolab Ltd. [2012] 138 ITD 323 (Mum ITAT); (e) Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2012] 20 Taxman.com 117(Kol); (t) CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom); (g) CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 518 (Punj & Haryana); (h) CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom). (ii) Without prejudice to the submission made in (i) above, the assessee submits that the computation of the allegedly disallowable amount by applying Rule 8D(2)(ii) by taking into account the average value of Investments a…

Sri Tara Chand Daptry, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle-40, Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1677/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 Sri Tara Chand Daptry, V/S. Acit, Circle-40, 107, Maniktala Road, 3, Govt. Place West, Kolkat-700 054 Kolkatda-700 001 [Pan No.Adqpd 6025 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri R. Choudhury, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 13-08-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 12-11-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Challenges Correctness Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata’S Order Dated 31.05.2016, Passed In Case No.305/Cit(A)-13/Cir-45/Kol/2014-15, In Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

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

…pted in assessment year 2008-09 as against in the impugned assessment year. All these clinching aspects have gone unrebutted during the course of hearing. We quote hon'ble Bombay high court’s landmark decision in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) to conclude that necessary ITA No.1677/Kol/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 Sh.Tara Chand Daptry Vs. ACIT, Cir-40, Kol. Page 4 presumption in such case is that of investment from non-interest bearing funds only. This taxpayer’s sole substantive ground is allowed therefore. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court 12/11/20…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Bangalore Housing Development and Investments, Bangalore

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

ITA 557/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…nds available with the assessee is sufficient to cover interest free advances given by the assessee. In particular, reliance was placed on a judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. as reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and also on a judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 393 ITR 261. 8. Regarding the issue raised by the revenue in its appeal in both years, he submitted that in Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 similar issue was decided by CIT(A) in favour of the assessee an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Bangalore Housing Development and Investment, Bangalore

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

ITA 556/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…nds available with the assessee is sufficient to cover interest free advances given by the assessee. In particular, reliance was placed on a judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. as reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and also on a judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 393 ITR 261. 8. Regarding the issue raised by the revenue in its appeal in both years, he submitted that in Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 similar issue was decided by CIT(A) in favour of the assessee an…

M/S Bangalore Housing Deveopment & Investments, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 425/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…nds available with the assessee is sufficient to cover interest free advances given by the assessee. In particular, reliance was placed on a judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. as reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and also on a judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Brindavan Beverages Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 393 ITR 261. 8. Regarding the issue raised by the revenue in its appeal in both years, he submitted that in Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09 similar issue was decided by CIT(A) in favour of the assessee an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Ideb Projects P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1389/BANG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…se of M/s Kems Auto Components Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 100/B/2014 dated 6.09.2016 (Copy Filed) and pointed out that in that case, the tribunal followed the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 540. 13. We have considered the rival submissions. In view of the facts noted above as per which, own interest free funds on both these dates i.e. 31.03.2009 and 31.03.2008 is in excess of interest free advances and by respectfully following the tribunal order cited by the learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of M/s Kems Auto C…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Ideb Projects P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1388/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…se of M/s Kems Auto Components Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 100/B/2014 dated 6.09.2016 (Copy Filed) and pointed out that in that case, the tribunal followed the Judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 540. 13. We have considered the rival submissions. In view of the facts noted above as per which, own interest free funds on both these dates i.e. 31.03.2009 and 31.03.2008 is in excess of interest free advances and by respectfully following the tribunal order cited by the learned AR of the assessee having been rendered in the case of M/s Kems Auto C…

Kanakia Spaces P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6686/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Acit, Central Circle- Ltd. 215 Atrium, 10Th Floor, 4(1), Air India Vs. Near Marriot Courtyard Building, 19Th Floor, Hotel, Andheri-Kurla Road, Nariman Point, Andheri (E), Mumbai- Mumbai. 400093. Pan No. Aaack2629J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/10/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Anuj Kisnadwala, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 24

…e loans were advanced by the assessee, it had sufficient interest-free funds available with it to cover the amount of M/s Kanakia Spaces 6 loan advanced by it. In this regard, reliance is placed by him on the decision in CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 stating that no disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) is required to be made if the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds to cover the loans advanced by it. Also it is submitted that due to lack of professional advice, the said documents could not be produced before the lower authorities. It is stated that these additional evidences would…

Budhraja Packaging P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 5125/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5125/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Budhraja Packaging P. Ltd. बिधम/ Acit(Osd)-10(1) 82-B, Sanjay Building No-5, Mumbai Vs. Mittal Estate, A.K. Road, Mumbai-400059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcb2461J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Anil Sathe सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 31.07.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-24 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The Ay. 2010- 11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “L. . The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Making An Addition Of Rs.2,17,097/- Without Analyzing & Appreciating Entire Factual Matrix Of The Current Case. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Passed The Order Without Considering The Fact That Interest Is To Be Allowed Under

For Appellant: Shri Anil SatheFor Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 36Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, VP AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5125/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Budhraja Packaging P. Ltd. बिधम/ ACIT(OSD)-10(1) 82-B, Sanjay Building No-5, Mumbai Vs. Mittal Estate, A.K. Road, Mumbai-400059 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AABCB2461J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR) Assessee by: Shri Anil Sathe सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 23.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM…

Kelvion India Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly Known As Gea Ecoflex India Pvt. Ltd.), Thane vs. ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4236/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 234BSection 36(1)(ii)

…s presented by him. 5. The Learned AR also submitted that own funds available with the assessee is more than the value of work-in-progress and hence as per the principles laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities Power Limited (313 ITR 340), the capital work-in-progress should be considered as met out of own funds only. Accordingly he submitted that there is no requirement of making any disallowance out of interest expenditure. 6. The Learned DR, on the contrary, submitted that the assessee has not furnished fund-flow statements to substantiate its claim. 7. We have heard rival c…

DCIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Infrastructure Finance Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3636/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Bled.C.I.T Circle – 14(2)(1) V. M/S. L&T Infrastructure Finance Co. Ltd Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, 3B Laxmi Towers, “G" Block, Plot No. C-25, Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051 Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aabcl 2283 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Department By : Shri S.C. Tiwari

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.C. Tiwari
Section 14ASection 37

…of the balance sheet of the assessee and noticing that assessee has its own funds in excess of investments. Ld. DR submitted that Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., [313 ITR 340] deleted the interest disallowed under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. On hearing the Ld. DR and on a perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(A), we find that the disallowance was deleted for the reason that the assessee has its own funds far exceeding the investments. The Ld.CIT(A) followed t…