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 367,368 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.

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Chaitanya Properties Pvt Ltd

ITA/569/2015HC Karnataka15 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14ASection 260

…1/14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 PRESENT THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A. No.569/2015 & I.T.A.No.229/2016 BETWEEN : 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIT [A], C.R. BUILDING QUEENS ROAD, BANGALORE. 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [OSD] CIRCLE- 11[2] RASHTROTHANA BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K.V.ARAVIND, ADV.) AND : M/S. CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD., No.17, SANKEY ROAD, BANGALORE PAN: AAACC 5900A.…

DCIT 1(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bennet Coleman & Company Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1952/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ts in shares and securities yielding tax free income. We notice that the assessee had sufficient own funds and is squarel covered by the ratio laid down by the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of "CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd." (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) which reads as under: "16. If there be interest-free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investments and at the same time the assessee had raised a loan it can be presumed that the investments were from the interest-free funds available. In our opinion, the Supreme Court in East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT [1997…

Indokem Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1419/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2011-12 Ito 6(3)(2), Indokem Ltd., Mumbai 410/411 Khatau House, Vs. Mogul Lane, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri M V Rajguru

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)Section 69C

…made from own funds available to the assessee and, therefore, no disallowance can be made towards expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii). In this regard he relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. vs. CIT [313 ITR 340]. As regards denial of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation of the assessment years 1996-97 to 2000-01, the assessee submitted that when the amendment was brought to section 32(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961, the period of eight years had not expired allowing indefinite carry forward of the losses. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was incorrec…

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indokem Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1414/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2011-12 Ito 6(3)(2), Indokem Ltd., Mumbai 410/411 Khatau House, Vs. Mogul Lane, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri M V Rajguru

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)Section 69C

Carol Info Service Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 14, Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 756/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37(1)

…AR that assessee had sufficient interest free funds, hence, presumption is that interest free funds are used for advancing interest free loans. For this purpose reliance was placed on the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340. Before us, assessee has filed additional advances as placed at page 34-37 of the Paperbook to show that assessee had not charged interest during the year as per the request of the companies. M/s. Carol Info Services Ltd., Otherwise, assessee was charging interest, therefore, it was contended that no disallowance is called for. 18. Our attention…

Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Hcc Real Estate Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 693/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Respondent: Shri B. Sriniwas

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM I.T.A. No.806/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. HCC Real Estate Ltd. Dy. CIT – 10(3), 11th Floor, 247 Park, Hincon House, Mumbai Vs. LBS Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400 083 PAN/GIR No. AABCH 6060 P (Assessee) (Revenue) : I.T.A. No.693/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Asst. CIT -15(2)(21), M/s. HCC Real Estate Ltd. Room No. 403, 4th Floor, 11th Floor, 247 Park, Hincon House, Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, LBS Marg, Vikhroli (W), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 083 PAN/GIR No. AABCH 6060 P (Revenue) : (A…

DCIT, Cir-6, Kolkata vs. M/S Cesc Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1304/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A. No. 1304/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 119Section 139Section 194CSection 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…he investments and when that point is not in dispute, no disallowance could be made u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions:- CIT-vs.- Reliance Utilities & Power ltd. reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) Interest on borrowed capital- investments by assessee- finding that investments were from interest free funds available with assessee-borrowed capital for the purposes of business- interest deductible under Income Tax Act u/s 36(1)(iii). G.D. Metsteel Pvt. Ltd. –vs.- ACIT reported in 142 TTJ 641 (Mumbai Tribunal) Held that the investment…

Cesc Limited, Kolkata vs. The DCIT RG-6, Kolkata

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

ITA 1187/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2018AY 2010-2011

Section 119Section 139Section 194CSection 40Section 40(1)(ia)

Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

ITA 1616/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…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 no finding by the assessing officer of any direct nexus of borrowed funds with investments: • Godrej & Boyce Manu…

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax CIT(A) vs. M/S. Advaith Motors Pvt Ltd

ITA/342/2016HC Karnataka12 Jun 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 14ASection 260Section 260A

…1/9 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12th DAY OF JUNE 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA I.T.A.No.342/2016 BETWEEN: 1. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIT(A), 5TH FLOOR, BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE-560 095. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1), 2ND FLOOR BMTC BUILDING, 80 FEET ROAD KORMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 095. …APPELLANTS (By Mr. K.V. ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S. ADVAITH MOTORS PVT. LTD., No.12, SHAMRAO COMPOUND MISSION ROAD, BANG…

DCIT 9(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power P.Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6704/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & C. N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6704/Mum/2016, िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Dy. Cit 9(3)(1) M/S. Dodson Lindblom Hydro Power Pvt. 215, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Ltd. Mumbai - 400020 Vs. 6-Shiv Vastu, Tejpal Scheme Road No.5, Vile Parle (E),Mumbai - 400057 Pan:Aaacd7612A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Ram Tiwari-Dr Assessee By: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/06/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2018 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य सद"य,राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार /Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 24.08.2016 Of Cit(A)-16, Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao) Has Filed The Present Appeal. Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Generation Of Hydro Electric Power, Filed Its Return Of Income On 21.09.2012, Declaring Total Income At Rs.2.57 Crore, Later On A Revised Return Was Filed On 19.08.2013 Declaring Income At Rs.1.96 Crores.On 25.09. 2013,The Assessee Revised The Return For The Second Time Disclosing Income Of Rs.3.57 Cores. The Ao Completed The Assessment On 28.02.2015,U/S.143(3) Of The Act,Determining Its Income At Rs. 5.53 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj K. Jain-ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-DR

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…them and the assessee, that the owned funds of the company (Rs.48.98 croes) were more than the advances(6.09 cores) given to AHPL, that the assessee utilised its own funds. Following the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities(313 ITR 340)he deleted the addition made by the AO. 4.During the course of hearing before us,the Departmental Representative (DR) argued that assessee had invested money for subscribing the debentures,that it had diverted the borrowed funds for making investment,that the AO had rightly made the addition.The Authorized Representative(AR )stated that the asse…

ACIT, Central Circle-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 37/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am] I.T.A. No. 37/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 14A

…he investments and when that point is not in dispute, no disallowance could be made u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions:- CIT-vs.- Reliance Utilities & Power ltd. reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) Interest on borrowed capital- investments by assessee- finding that investments were from interest free funds available with assessee-borrowed capital for the purposes of business-interest deductible under Income Tax Act u/s 36(1)(iii). G.D. Metsteel Pvt. Ltd. –vs.- ACIT reported in 142 TTJ 641 (Mumbai Tribunal) Held that the investments…

Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

ITA 4448/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.4448/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Mangalore Refinery & Addl Cit 3(2) Petrochemicals Ltd. Mumbai बिधम/ 15Th Floor, Maker Tower, E- Vs. Wing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm5132A & आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 4436/Mum/2013 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Dcit-3(2) Mangalore Refinery & Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. बिधम/ 15Th Floor, Maker Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Tower, E-Wing, Cuffe Vs. Parade, Mumbai- 400005. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm5132A अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Madhur Agrawal /Ronak Desai प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Samuel Darse सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 08/06/2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 08/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement Mangalore Refinery & Petrochemicals Ltd.

For Appellant: Sh. Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Sh. Samuel Darse

Section 115JSection 14ASection 40Section 44Section 44B

…w by submitting that the assessee had own sufficient funds /net worth as compared to the investment made by the assessee. In this respect, reliance was place on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vrs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). Ld. AR also drawn our attention to the chart showing the details of average investments and average net worth, contained at page no. 17 of the order of Ld. CIT(A) in order to show that the assessee had sufficient own fund /net worth. Ld. AR further submitted that a petition for admitting additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A) under rule 46A…

A.C.I.T.2(1), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1891/MUM/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajnikant V. ChaniyariFor Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)

…isallowance is called for on account of interest vide Rule 8D(2)(ii) of IT Rules, 1962. In this regard, he relied on various decisions including that of the judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 340, with which we agree. Regarding the disallowance out of administrative expenses, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that disallowance of a reasonable percentage of the exempt income is an accepted method of quantifying the disallowance of expenses for the AYs prior to AY 2008-2009, the year of amendment to Rule 8D of IT Rules, 1962. In this re…

Kanubhai M. Patel, Vapi vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2094/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2094/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2012-13 Shri Kanubhai M. Patel, Prop. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Bharat Acid & Chemical Plot Income Tax, Circle -Vapi No. Cib/32 Gidc Vapi Pan:Accpp 2381D अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143

…se of Arihant Avenue & Credit Ltd. [2013] 217 Taxman 105 (Guj), CIT V. Raghuvir Synthetics Ltd. [2013] 354 ITR 227 (Guj) , and CIT vs. Reliance Shri Kanubhai M Patel v. ACIT-Vapi/I.T.A. No.2094/Ahd/2016/A.Y.:12-13 Page 4 of 5 Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009)313 ITR 340 (Bom)/ 178 Taxman 135 (Bom). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT (A) observed that the assessee could not establish that the said advance is given out of interest-free funds available with the appellant. It is also disclosed that the said loan/ advance has been given out…

Bayer Cropscience Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7619/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Paras S. Savla, A.R. &For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swarup, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(2)

…herefore, the question of interest disallowance does not arise. In this regard, relied upon plethora of judgments, including the 8 M/s. Bayer CropScience Ltd. judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case “CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.” (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom). 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. There is no dispute with regard to applicability of provisions of section 14A. The assessee itself has made suo- moto disallowances in its return of income for Rs.21,26,636/-. However, such disallowance has been recomputed to Rs.4,15,300/- during the course of assessmen…

Dy C.I.T..1(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. Shri Ismail Mohammed, Raipur (Cg)

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

ITA 214/BIL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner Of Shri Ismail Mohammed, Income Tax-1(1), 24/347, Dr. Virdhi Gali Marg, Central Revenue Building, Jawahar Nagar, Civil Lines, Vs. Raipur (C.G.) Raipur (C.G.) Pan: Aispm8617R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Sheetal Shashwat Verma (Dr) Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Date Of Hearing: 05/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/06/2018

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sheetal Shashwat Verma (DR)

Section 143Section 40

…but were diverted as advance to members of the HUF free of interest and, therefore, there is no justification in making part disallowance out of interest paid on borrowed funds”. The Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Mum) has held that “The principal therefore would be that if there are funds available both interest free and overdraft and/or loan taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest free funds generated or available with the company, if the interest free funds were sufficient to meet the investment.: Hon’ble All…

Hi Choice Processors Pvt.Ltd., Surat vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Surat

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

ITA 2922/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2922/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2011-12 M/S. Hi Choice Processors Pvt. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. , 264 Gidc, Sachin Surat Income-Tax, Central Pan: Aaach 7062E Circle1, Surat अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 14A

…learned counsel for the assessee submitted the assessee has sufficient interest free advances out of which loan to sister concern was advanced @12% interest. Hence, placing reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009)313 ITR 340 (Bom) / 178 Taxman 135 (Bom) wherein it was held If there are funds available both, interest-free and overdraft and/or loans are taken, then a presumption would arise that investments would be out of the interest-free fund generated or available with the company, if the interest-free funds are sufficient to meet the investments. The learned couns…

The ACIT, Central-1, Indore vs. M/S. Arihant Capital Markets Ltd., Indore

In the result, the appeal of the revenue and cross objection of

ITA 370/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…which interest expenditure was incurred whereas in the case of the assessee investments were incurred in respect of such investment. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited; 313 ITR 340 and another judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd.; 366 ITR 505. The learned counsel for the assessee further placed reliance on the following judgments :- A For the proposition that if both funds are available with the assessee that is interest bearing and interest free, then the presumption would arise that inve…

M/S Eko Diagnostic Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-3, Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 56/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2010-11 M/S Eko Diagnostic Pvt. V/S. Dcit, Circle-3, Aayakar Ltd., 54, Jawaharlal Bhawana, P-7, Nehru Road, Central Chowringhee Square, Kolkata, Kolkat-700071 Kolkata-69 [Pan No.Aaace 6366J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri S. Dasgupta, Addl. Cit-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 28-05-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 31-05-2018 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 Arises Against Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Kolkata’S Order Dated 16.12.2015, In Case No.53/Cit(A)-5/Cir-3/13-14/14-15 Affirming Assessing Officer’S Action Inter Alia Disallowing / Adding Interest On Loans U/S 36(1)(Iii) & Ad Hoc Disallowance In Relation To Ambulance Service Expenditure Involving Sums Of ₹13,06,190/- & ₹3,82,213/-; Respectively In Proceedings U/S143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. We Come To The Former Issue Of U/S 36(1)(Iii) Interest Disallowance Of ₹13,06,190/- Made In The Course Of Assessment As Upheld By The Cit(A) In Lower Appellate Proceedings With The Following Detailed Discussion:- “2. Ground No.1 Interest On Loan Of Rs.13,06,190/-

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

…sponding figures sums of ₹413,22,400/-; ₹110,861,276/-, ₹235,90,644/- and ₹768,34,551/-) as against the relevant capital work-in-progress of ₹272,86,310/-. We quote hon’ble Bombay high court’s landmark decision in CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) to presume that only the above non-interest bearing funds than borrowed funds have been utilized for the impugned cost of wok-in-progress. We make it clear that the above quoted figures of non interest bearing funds have not been disputed at the Revenue’s behest very fairly. The impugned disallowance is therefore ITA No.56/Kol/2016 A.Y. 20…