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 367,514 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.

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 5661/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 36(1)(iii)

…surplus funds and such funds are utilised as interest free advances even for a non-business purpose, there cannot be any disallowance of interest paid on interest bearing loans. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2001) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), has held that where an assessee possessed sufficient interest free funds of its own which were generated in the course of relevant financial year, apart from substantial shareholders’ funds, presumption stands established that the investments in sister concerns were made by the assessee out of interest free funds and, therefore, no part of…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Escorts Heart Institute & Research Centre Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 5660/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 36(1)(iii)

…surplus funds and such funds are utilised as interest free advances even for a non-business purpose, there cannot be any disallowance of interest paid on interest bearing loans. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2001) 313 ITR 340 (Bom), has held that where an assessee possessed sufficient interest free funds of its own which were generated in the course of relevant financial year, apart from substantial shareholders’ funds, presumption stands established that the investments in sister concerns were made by the assessee out of interest free funds and, therefore, no part of…

ACIT, Circle-14(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Atc Logistics Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed

ITA 1619/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1619/Kol/2016 Assessment Years : 2012-13 Acit, Circle-14(1),Kolkata -Vs- M/S Atc Logistics Pvt. Ltd. [Pan: Aahca 3020 A ] (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 57/Kol/2016 (Arising Out Of I.T.A No. 1619/Kol/2016) Assessment Years : 2012-13 M/S Atc Logistics Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-14(1),Kolkata [Pan: Aahca 3020 A ] (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Hangshing, CITFor Respondent: Shri S.M Surana, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 194C(6)Section 194C(7)Section 40

…cient own funds in the form of share capital and reserves and surplus which is several times more than the interest free advances made and placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom), among other decisions. The ld CITA observed that own funds of the assessee company as per the balance sheet was Rs 9.20 crores and interest free loans given to related parties was Rs 2.25 crores. Since the interest free loans of Rs 2.25 crores was less than own funds of Rs 9.20 crores, he held that it would be incorrect to state the borrow…

M/S Titagarh Wagons Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-1, Kolkata

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

ITA 750/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 750/Kol/2015 Assessment Years : 2009-10 M/S Titagarh Wagons Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Range-1, Kolkata [Pan: Aabct 1377 P ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(2)

…he own funds available with the assessee company are several times more than the investments made and hence by placing reliance on the various decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court more particularly in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom), no disallowance of interest under second limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules is warranted. We find that the ld CITA had upheld the action of the ld AO by simply making a general finding that disallowance has been made in accordance with Rule 8D of the Rules. When the own funds are sufficiently available with the assessee which is staring on us…

M/S. Exide Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata

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

ITA 1393/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hat when assessee is possessed of mixed funds which includes its own funds in sufficient quantity, a presumption that its own funds were utilized for the advances is to be drawn as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Utility & Power Ltd. Vs. CIT 313 ITR 340. Relying on the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, we find force in this ground raised by the assessee. Therefore, we direct the AO to verify the facts stated above and if it is found that assessee had own funds to make investment in tax free securities, then no disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act is warranted. So this ground of as…

DCIT, Circle - 1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Exide Industries Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1379/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hat when assessee is possessed of mixed funds which includes its own funds in sufficient quantity, a presumption that its own funds were utilized for the advances is to be drawn as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Utility & Power Ltd. Vs. CIT 313 ITR 340. Relying on the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, we find force in this ground raised by the assessee. Therefore, we direct the AO to verify the facts stated above and if it is found that assessee had own funds to make investment in tax free securities, then no disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act is warranted. So this ground of as…

ACIT Cir 1, Thane vs. Emco Ltd, Thane

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 1289/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “E” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1289/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) बिाम/ ACIT Circle- 1, Emco Ltd. Ashar IT Park 6 th Floor, Plot No. F-5, „B‟ Wing, RoomNo. 22, Wagle Industrial Estate v. Road No. 16 Z Road no. 28, Wagle Indl Estate Thane West- 400604 Thane (W) -400604 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACE2764Q (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari Assessee by: None सुनवाई की तारीख /D…

M/S.Ecoplast Ltd., Valsad vs. Dy.Cmmissioner of Income Tax, Valsad Renge, Valsad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 943/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.943/Ahd/2016/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Ecoplast Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of S.No.309, National Highway Income Tax, No.8, Water Works Cross Road, Valsad Range, Abrama, Valsad – 396 001. Valsad – 396 001. [Pan: Aaace 5030 H] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Tushar P. Hemani – Adv. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri J.K.Chandnani – Sr.Dr 12.07.2018 सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 18.09.2018 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On आदेश /O R D E R Per O. P. Meena, Accoutant Member: 1. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad (In Short “The Cit (A)”) Dated 01.03.2016 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2012-13, Which In Turn Has Arisen From The Order Passed By The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Valsad Circle, Valsad (In Short “The Ao”) Dated 17.02.2015 Under Section 143(3) Of Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’).

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

…vs. Torrent Power Ltd. 363 ITR 474 (Guj), CIT vs. Sujlon Engery Ltd. 354 ITR 630 (Guj), CIT vs Hitachi Home & Life Solution (I) Ltd. [2014] 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj), Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT 298 ITR 298 (SC), CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom). 6. Per contra, the ld.Sr.DR supported the orders of the Lower Authorities. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and find that the money was lent in pursuance of JVC agreement dated 21.08.2007 and as per Board resolution. It is further noticed that amount was lend to sister concern on which interest @ 6% for the part period of the year ha…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1187/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…-free funds available with the assessee. 5 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 2.4. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) ,AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 601 (Bom) and CIT v. LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 416 (Bom). The Hon'ble Court also considered the cases of CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 391 (Raj) (para 2)CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (para 4) CIT v. L…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1188/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…-free funds available with the assessee. 5 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 2.4. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) ,AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 601 (Bom) and CIT v. LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 416 (Bom). The Hon'ble Court also considered the cases of CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 391 (Raj) (para 2)CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (para 4) CIT v. L…

Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 469/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…-free funds available with the assessee. 5 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 2.4. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) ,AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 601 (Bom) and CIT v. LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 416 (Bom). The Hon'ble Court also considered the cases of CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 391 (Raj) (para 2)CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (para 4) CIT v. L…

Sharekhan Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 468/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…-free funds available with the assessee. 5 M/s Sharekhan Ltd. ITA Nos.469, 469, 1187 & 1188/Mum/2017 2.4. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, the Hon'ble High Court considered the decision in the case of CIT v. RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) ,AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORPORATION v. CIT [2002] 258 ITR 601 (Bom) and CIT v. LORD KRISHNA BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 416 (Bom). The Hon'ble Court also considered the cases of CIT v. Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. [2009] 316 ITR 391 (Raj) (para 2)CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (para 4) CIT v. L…

DCIT, Cir-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Bhoruka Investment (P) Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 683/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ]

For Appellant: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri R.S.Agarwal, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)

…ntly contends during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in reversing the impugned disallowance qua the above two components. It fails to dispute first of all that various high courts i.e. CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340& CIT vs Suzlon Energy Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 630(Guj) have held that the impugned proportionate expenditure disallowance in question under Rule 8D (2)(ii)of the Income Tax Rules does not apply in case of an assessee having surplus non interest bearing funds since its investments ITA No.683/Kol/2017 M/s. Bhoruka Investment (P)Ltd. A.Y.2013-14 3 mad…

Allied Digital Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3, Mumbai

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

ITA 3569/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Allied Digital Services Ltd. Dcit, Cc- 3, 13A, 13Th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. Ncpa, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaaca5509K Appellant Respondent M/S Allied Digital Services Ltd. Dcit, Cc- 3, 13A, 13Th Floor, Earnest House, Mumbai. Ncpa, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaaca5509K Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rakesh Joshi (Ar) Respondent By : Shri R.P. Meena (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income –Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Joshi (AR)For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 253Section 254(1)

…he submission of assessee that the assessee has sufficient interest free fund available with them and in view of the decision of jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. 12 ITA No.3569 & 3570/M/16- M/s Allied Digital Services Ltd. Reliance Utility & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340. The ld. CIT(A) after examining the share capital and reserve available with the assessee, which are more than the investment made by assessee and thereby deleted the disallowance of Rs. 1,00,74,536/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii). So far as disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) worked out at Rs. 47,91,103/- is concerned, the assessee contended that bulk of…

Orient Paper & Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed in the above terms

ITA 817/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri A.ChoudhuryFor Respondent: Shri A.Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 143Section 14A

…e gone undisputed from the Revenue’s side. We therefore quote hon’ble Gujarat high court’s decision in PCIT vs Nima Credit & Capital Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 300 CTR 286 (Gujarat) as well as that of hon’ble Bombay high court in CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 to conclude that the impugned section 14A disallowance is not sustainable in case of an assessee having surplus non interest bearing funds thereby deriving net interest income and that the necessary presumption in this kind of factual back drop is that it had made investments out of non interest bearing funds only; respectively to delete the impu…

Allied Media Network P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3545/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Allied Media Network Pvt. Dcit, Range-7(1), Aayakar Ltd., P-2, Level 3, Percept Bhavan, M.K. Marg Vs. House, 22 Raghuvanshi Mumbai-400020 Estate, 11/12 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aadcp9975H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Pankaj Jain, Ar Revenue By : Ms. S. Padmaja, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/06/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Pankaj Jain, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Allied Media Network Pvt. DCIT, Range-7(1), Aayakar Ltd., P-2, Level 3, Percept Bhavan, M.K. Marg Vs. House, 22 Raghuvanshi Mumbai-400020 Estate, 11/12 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. PAN No. AADCP9975H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Pankaj Jain, AR Revenue by : Ms. S. Padmaja, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 05/04/2018 Date of pronouncement: 27/06/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The…

M/S Munjal Showa Limited, Haryana vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

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

ITA 1579/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2010-11 Vs Dcit, Circle 17(1), Munjal Showa Ltd., 9-11, Maruti Industrial Area, New Delhi. Gurgaon, Haryana. Pan: Aaacm0070D

Section 14ASection 94(8)

…er the surplus funds have been used to make the investment. While respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of HT Media vs Pr. CIT (2017) 85 Taxmann.com 113 (Del), CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Powers Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom); CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2010) 326 ITR 1 (SC); and Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs DCIT, 328 ITR 81, it was held that in the absence of AO determining the direct nexus between parties funds and investment, no question of invoking the provisions of Section 14A arises. While respectfully following the decisions cited…

DCIT 32(3), Mumbai vs. Pratap U. Purohit, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6430/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Dcit 32(3) Vs. Shri Pratap U. Purohit R.No.108, 1St Floor 307, Jalaram Business C-11, Pratakshyakar Bhavan Centre, Ganjawala Lane Bkc, Bandra Near Chamunda Circle Mumbai-400 051 Borivali (W) Mumbai – 400 068 Pan/Gir No. Ahcpp6451F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM DCIT 32(3) Vs. Shri Pratap U. Purohit R.No.108, 1st Floor 307, Jalaram Business C-11, Pratakshyakar Bhavan Centre, Ganjawala Lane BKC, Bandra Near Chamunda Circle Mumbai-400 051 Borivali (W) Mumbai – 400 068 PAN/GIR No. AHCPP6451F Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri Ashish K V Assessee by Shri Sanjay Kapadia Date of Hearing 11/06/2018 Date of Pronouncement 20/06/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)- 44, Mumbai dated 22/08/2…

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Range-11, New Delhi

In the result ground No

ITA 6990/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblei.T.A. No. 6990/Del/2017 (A.Y 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…xman 370 (Cal)  CIT v. Caroline Investment Ltd.: 87 Taxman 238 (Cal)  CIT v. Kanoria Investment (P) Ltd.: 232 ITR 7 (Cal)  CIT vs. Hotel Savera: 239 ITR 795 (Mad)  Smt. Chanchal Katyal v. CIT: 298 ITR 182 (All.)  CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom) Reliance is also placed on the following cases, wherein, the Courts have repeatedly held that interest expenditure cannot be disallowed under section 14A of the Act, where the assessee had sufficient surplus funds and there was investments:  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Pvt. Ltd. VS DCIT 394 ITR 449(SC)  Pr. CIT vs. GMM Pfaulder Ltd.…

Prashant H. Valia, Mumbai vs. DCIT 20(2), Mumbai

In the result ground No.2&3 of the

ITA 6389/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhshri Prashant H. Valia Dcit-20(2), 301, Heritage Plaza, A-Wing, 613, Piramal Chambers, 6Th Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Telli Galli Cross Lane, Vs. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400069. Pan: Aabv0946M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Devdatta Mainkar (Ar) Respondent By : Ms. Arju Garodia (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2018 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh; 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner

For Appellant: Shri Devdatta Mainkar (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Prashant H. Valia DCIT-20(2), 301, Heritage Plaza, A-Wing, 613, Piramal Chambers, 6th Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Telli Galli Cross Lane, Vs. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400012. Mumbai-400069. PAN: AABV0946M Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Devdatta Mainkar (AR) Respondent by : Ms. Arju Garodia (DR) Date of Hearing : 19.06.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2018 ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1)OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is direct…