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 367,154 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.

Income Tax Officer-Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1495/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…than the total surplus and interest free funds of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 135 (Bombay)/[2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay)/[2009] 221 CTR 435 (Bombay)[09-01-2009], where in case of mixed funds the presumption is that the assessee has given interest free loan out of the own funds. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for earlier years where on identical issue on disallowance of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act was set…

Income Tax Officer Ward-6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1493/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…than the total surplus and interest free funds of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 135 (Bombay)/[2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay)/[2009] 221 CTR 435 (Bombay)[09-01-2009], where in case of mixed funds the presumption is that the assessee has given interest free loan out of the own funds. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for earlier years where on identical issue on disallowance of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act was set…

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1159/MUM/2024[AY 2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…than the total surplus and interest free funds of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 135 (Bombay)/[2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay)/[2009] 221 CTR 435 (Bombay)[09-01-2009], where in case of mixed funds the presumption is that the assessee has given interest free loan out of the own funds. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for earlier years where on identical issue on disallowance of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act was set…

Kohinoor Planet Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1158/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Apr 2025

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Smt. Renu Jauhri, Am & Kohinoor Planet Constructions Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Ltd. Tax, Circle 6(3)(1) 506, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Senapati Vs. Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai – 400028. 400020. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) & Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3)(1) Kohinoor Planet Constructions Room No. 524, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai – 3, Kohinoor Corporate Office, Vs. 400020. Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar West, Mumbai – 400028. Pan/Gir No. Aabcr6994E (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Jayesh Dadia : Shri. Biswanath Das – Cit Dr. Respondent By : 30.01.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench: These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short)

For Appellant: Shri. Jayesh DadiaFor Respondent: 30.01.2025
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 36(2)Section 37Section 43CSection 68

…than the total surplus and interest free funds of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 178 Taxman 135 (Bombay)/[2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay)/[2009] 221 CTR 435 (Bombay)[09-01-2009], where in case of mixed funds the presumption is that the assessee has given interest free loan out of the own funds. The ld. CIT(A) also relied on the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for earlier years where on identical issue on disallowance of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act was set…

M/S Orbit Resorts (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, C-1(1), Chandigarh

In the result, both appeals are allowed

ITA 342/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA, Shri Aditya Kumar,CA &For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

…) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) ITA No.341 & 342/CHD/2019 A.Y.2007-08 & 2012-13 4 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 Palongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 5. In view of the above, no disallowance is sustainable. We allow both the appeals and delete the disallowance. 6. In the result, both appeals are allowed. Order pronounced on 08.04.2025. (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT…

M/S Orbit Resorts (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Addl. CIT, R-1, Chandigarh

In the result, both appeals are allowed

ITA 341/CHANDI/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA, Shri Aditya Kumar,CA &For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR

…) CIT Vs Max India Ltd (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P&H) ITA No.341 & 342/CHD/2019 A.Y.2007-08 & 2012-13 4 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 Palongi & Co 423 ITR 220 (Bom) j) Decision of ITAT Chandigarh in ITA No. 184/Chd/2015 5. In view of the above, no disallowance is sustainable. We allow both the appeals and delete the disallowance. 6. In the result, both appeals are allowed. Order pronounced on 08.04.2025. (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Mawana Sugar Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2006-07, 2012-

ITA 6081/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Taran Deep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT DR
Section 2Section 2(47)Section 391

…s own funds of Rs 188.52 crores in form of capital and ITA No.457& 5830/DEL/2016 ITA No.5489 to 5490/DEL/2018 ITA No.516 & 6081/DEL/2016 ITA No.5835 & 5836/DEL/2018 reserves. In this regard Ld AR relied upon decisions in case of Reliance Utilities reported in 313 ITR 340(Bom) and South India Bank reported din 438 ITR 1(SC). Ld AR thereafter submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has also not properly appreciated the facts of the case. It was submitted that as regards investments made in JEW (i.e Equity Share investment of Rs 11cr and Preference Share Investment in 7 cr) which now vest with Siel Holdings Limited as per SOA,…

Siel Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2006-07, 2012-

ITA 6301/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Taran Deep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT DR
Section 2Section 2(47)Section 391

…s own funds of Rs 188.52 crores in form of capital and ITA No.457& 5830/DEL/2016 ITA No.5489 to 5490/DEL/2018 ITA No.516 & 6081/DEL/2016 ITA No.5835 & 5836/DEL/2018 reserves. In this regard Ld AR relied upon decisions in case of Reliance Utilities reported in 313 ITR 340(Bom) and South India Bank reported din 438 ITR 1(SC). Ld AR thereafter submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has also not properly appreciated the facts of the case. It was submitted that as regards investments made in JEW (i.e Equity Share investment of Rs 11cr and Preference Share Investment in 7 cr) which now vest with Siel Holdings Limited as per SOA,…

Siel Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2006-07, 2012-

ITA 6300/DEL/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Mar 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shris.Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Taran Deep Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Baljeet Kaur, CIT DR
Section 2Section 2(47)Section 391

…s own funds of Rs 188.52 crores in form of capital and ITA No.457& 5830/DEL/2016 ITA No.5489 to 5490/DEL/2018 ITA No.516 & 6081/DEL/2016 ITA No.5835 & 5836/DEL/2018 reserves. In this regard Ld AR relied upon decisions in case of Reliance Utilities reported in 313 ITR 340(Bom) and South India Bank reported din 438 ITR 1(SC). Ld AR thereafter submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has also not properly appreciated the facts of the case. It was submitted that as regards investments made in JEW (i.e Equity Share investment of Rs 11cr and Preference Share Investment in 7 cr) which now vest with Siel Holdings Limited as per SOA,…

DCIT-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. L and T Infrastructure Finance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1666/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Dharod,ARFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash (CIT-DR)
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…tal income of the assessee u/s 14A of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made by the AO and allowed this ground of appeal relying on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.).He held that earning of Dividend as well as exempt LTCG did not require any specific administrative efforts and hence, no expenses were incurred for earning such income. Further, he relied on decision of Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata in case of ACIT V/s Coal India Ltd. ITA No. 1032/Kol/2012 for holding that no investment value is to be considered f…

DCIT-14.1.1, Mumbai vs. L and T Infrastructure Finance Company Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 3568/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Alpesh Dharod,ARFor Respondent: Dr. K.R. Subhash (CIT-DR)
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…tal income of the assessee u/s 14A of the Act. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made by the AO and allowed this ground of appeal relying on the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.).He held that earning of Dividend as well as exempt LTCG did not require any specific administrative efforts and hence, no expenses were incurred for earning such income. Further, he relied on decision of Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata in case of ACIT V/s Coal India Ltd. ITA No. 1032/Kol/2012 for holding that no investment value is to be considered f…

Pr. CIT -3 vs. Dlf Ltd.(Fomerly Known As Dlf Universal Ltd

ITA/926/2016HC Delhi06 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

…the purpose of computing interest disallowance. Ld. CIT (A) has presumed proportion of utilisation of funds in absence of the nexus holding that assesse has used mixed funds. Honourable Bombay High court in case of CIT V Reliance Utilities & Power limited 313 ITR 340 has held that “The principle therefore would be that if there are funds available both interest free and overdraft and/or loans taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds were sufficient to meet the investments.” Therefore…

Pr. CIT -3 vs. Dlf Ltd. (Formerly Known As Dlf Universal Ltd.)

ITA/928/2016HC Delhi06 Mar 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

…the purpose of computing interest disallowance. Ld. CIT (A) has presumed proportion of utilisation of funds in absence of the nexus holding that assesse has used mixed funds. Honourable Bombay High court in case of CIT V Reliance Utilities & Power limited 313 ITR 340 has held that “The principle therefore would be that if there are funds available both interest free and overdraft and/or loans taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds were sufficient to meet the investments.” Therefore…

DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co. Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2234/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…to this fact, the ITAT in its decision in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 vide ITA 2025/M/2021 dated 28.03.2024 after considering the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) has deleted the addition on the ground that if the interest free funds of the assessee are in the excess of the loan advance then it can be presumed that the funds invested by the said entities are not out of the borrowed fund. Looking to the above fact and finding, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this…

DCIT 3(3) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Shapoorji Pallonji and Co.Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2232/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…to this fact, the ITAT in its decision in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 vide ITA 2025/M/2021 dated 28.03.2024 after considering the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) has deleted the addition on the ground that if the interest free funds of the assessee are in the excess of the loan advance then it can be presumed that the funds invested by the said entities are not out of the borrowed fund. Looking to the above fact and finding, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this…

Shapoorji Pallonji & Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2027/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…to this fact, the ITAT in its decision in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 vide ITA 2025/M/2021 dated 28.03.2024 after considering the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) has deleted the addition on the ground that if the interest free funds of the assessee are in the excess of the loan advance then it can be presumed that the funds invested by the said entities are not out of the borrowed fund. Looking to the above fact and finding, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this…

Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3) (1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and cross objections are dismissed

ITA 2026/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora a/w Shri Nikhil Tiwari & Ms. Palak MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT/DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 92C

…to this fact, the ITAT in its decision in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 vide ITA 2025/M/2021 dated 28.03.2024 after considering the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, Mumbai in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) has deleted the addition on the ground that if the interest free funds of the assessee are in the excess of the loan advance then it can be presumed that the funds invested by the said entities are not out of the borrowed fund. Looking to the above fact and finding, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this…

Chimanlal Maneklal Securities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 126/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal & Ms Neha Paranjpe,ARsFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…see and after digesting all decisions on the subject, the Court noticed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Utilities & P a g e | 6 ITA No. 125, 126/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2014-15, 2015-16 Chimanlal Maneklal Securities Private Limited Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 (Bom), which was later confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 37/2019 vide order dated 02- 01-2019,wherein it was held that where the interest free funds far exceed the value of investments, it should be considered that investments have been made out of interest free funds and no disallowance u/s. 14A towards any interest expenditure c…

Chimanlal Maneklal Securities Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 125/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal & Ms Neha Paranjpe,ARsFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…see and after digesting all decisions on the subject, the Court noticed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Utilities & P a g e | 6 ITA No. 125, 126/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2014-15, 2015-16 Chimanlal Maneklal Securities Private Limited Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 (Bom), which was later confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 37/2019 vide order dated 02- 01-2019,wherein it was held that where the interest free funds far exceed the value of investments, it should be considered that investments have been made out of interest free funds and no disallowance u/s. 14A towards any interest expenditure c…

M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle -9(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 298/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Dy. Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, 501, Supreme Chambers, Vs. Circle-9(1)(2), Off Veer Desai Road, 2Nd Floor, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Maharshi Karve Road, Pan : Aaccb7416Q Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Malav P. ShethFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Chandra Sinha
Section 115JSection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s. Atlanta Infra Assets Dy. Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, 501, Supreme Chambers, vs. Circle-9(1)(2), Off Veer Desai Road, 2nd Floor, Andheri (East), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Maharshi Karve Road, PAN : AACCB7416Q Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Malav P. Sheth Revenue by : Shri Umesh Chandra Sinha, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27-02-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28-02-2025 ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The as…