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.

Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 505/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

Kesoram Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1188/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. Addl C.I.T RG - 5, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 773/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

D.C.I.T Cir - 5, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries Limited, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1995/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

ACIT, Circle-5, Kolkata vs. M/S Kesoram Industries. Ltd, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1722/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

Kesoram Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. Add.CIT, Range-5, Kolkata

In the result the revenue’s appeals for A

ITA 1037/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…AR placed reliance on the judgment of the Jurisdictional Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Rasoi Ltd. (ITA 109 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340). 6. We note that the assessee had own funds of Rs. 981.92 and the investments were only to the tune of Rs. 47.88 crores at the end of the year. From this figures we find that the assessee had at its disposals sufficient funds to make the investment which yielded exempt income. We further note that in the past years, the department did not dispu…

DCIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S Devakar Investment & Trading Company (P) Ltd., Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 691/CHANDI/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. Rajiv ThaparFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

…08/2014 for A.Y. 2008-09. In this case the Hon'ble High Court upheld the disallowance of interest expenditure computed as per rule 8D(2)(ii) for mixed funds. The Hon'ble High Court distinguished the decision of Bombay High Court in case of Reliance utilities (313 ITR 340) and Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Hero Cycles (323 ITR 528) for the proposition that when interest free funds are available with the assessee then it will be presumed that such funds have been invested in various investment. The relevant extract of the judgement is as under: "Learned counsel for the appellant refers to Bombay High Cour…

Mukta Arts Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 1658/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1658/Mum/2013 & 1629/Mum/2015 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11) बिाम/ Mukta Arts Limited Addl. Cit 11(1) 3Rd Floor, Mukta House Aayakar Bhavan, Filmcity Complex, M K Road V. Goregaon(East) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400065 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacm9513F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram &For Respondent: Shri. T A Khan

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…t held by the assessee and in our considered view, presumption will apply that the assessee invested its own funds towards making investments in securities, as held by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (2009) 313 ITR 340(Bom.) and HDFC Bank Limited v. DCIT (2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom.). Thus, we hold that no disallowance of interest expenses are warranted u/s 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(ii) of Rs. 9,04,440/- as disallowed by the AO in view of presumption that the assessee invested its own funds towards investments in securities in view of above stated decision of Hon’ble Bombay…

Dulal Kanti Chowdhury, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-50, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue (in Ground Nos

ITA 91/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.91/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dulal Kanti Choudhury Vs. Dcit, Cir-50, Kolkata Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9Th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. 4Th International R.No.402, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Acrbc 0745 K (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.188/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Cir-50, Kolkata Vs. Dulal Kanti Choudhury Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9Th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. International R.No.402, 4Th Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Acrbc 0745 K (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri N. M. Bhansali, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.91/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dulal Kanti Choudhury Vs. DCIT, Cir-50, Kolkata Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. 4th International R.No.402, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. : ACRBC 0745 K (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.188/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT, Cir-50, Kolkata Vs. Dulal Kanti Choudhury Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S.…

ACIT, Cir-50, Kolkata vs. Shri Dulal Kanti Chowdhury, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue (in Ground Nos

ITA 188/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.91/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dulal Kanti Choudhury Vs. Dcit, Cir-50, Kolkata Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9Th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. 4Th International R.No.402, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Acrbc 0745 K (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.188/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit, Cir-50, Kolkata Vs. Dulal Kanti Choudhury Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9Th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. International R.No.402, 4Th Shantipally, Kolkata-700107. Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Acrbc 0745 K (Revenue) .. (Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri N. M. Bhansali, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.91/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dulal Kanti Choudhury Vs. DCIT, Cir-50, Kolkata Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S. 4th International R.No.402, Shantipally, Kolkata-700107 Floor, Kolkata – 1. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. : ACRBC 0745 K (Assessee) .. (Revenue) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.188/Kol/2016 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) DCIT, Cir-50, Kolkata Vs. Dulal Kanti Choudhury Ayakar Bhavan, Poorva, 9th Floor 19, Synagogue Street, S.S.…

DCIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4355/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-2(1)(1) M/S Bank Of Baroda Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 Pan: Aaacb1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bank Of Baroda Dcit-2(1)(1) Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 Pan: Aaacb1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit-2(1)(1) M/S Bank Of Baroda Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 Pan: Aaacb1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bank Of Baroda Dcit-2(1)(1) Vs. Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road

Section 253Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT-2(1)(1) M/s Bank of Baroda Room No. 561, 5th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Vs. Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 PAN: AAACB1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s Bank of Baroda DCIT-2(1)(1) Room No. 561, 5th Floor, C-26, ‘G’ Block, Baroda Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai-400051 PAN: AAACB1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) DCIT-2(1)(1)…

Dciat 14(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Sundaram Multipap Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 5327/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

…earned CIT(A) noticed that the own funds available with the assessee are in far excess of value of investments made by the assessee. Accordingly, by following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), the learned CIT(A) deleted the disallowance made out of interest expenditure. However, he sustained the disallowance made out of administrative expenses under rule 8D(2)(iii) of the I.T. Rules, since the assessee itself has disallowed the same. 4. The revenue is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made…

Symphony International, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 18(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6291/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Symphony International Asst. Commissioner Of 17/19, Shamaldas Gandhi Vs. Income Tax-18(3), Marg, Princess Street, Near C-11, 6Th Floor, Room Mangaldas Market, Marine No. 602, Bandra Kurla Lines (E), Complex, Bandra, Mumbai-400002. Mumbai-400051. Pan No. Aamfs2805B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Mukesh B. Advani, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Saurabh Rai, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Mukesh B. Advani, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Saurabh Rai, DR

Section 143Section 14A

….7,583,012/-. In HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 42 M/s Symphony International 4 (Bom), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court referring to the decision in CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom) and CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) held as under : “15. It is clear that for the first time in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra) that this Court took a view that the presumption which has been laid down in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra) with regard to investment in tax free securities coming out of assessee's own funds in case the same are in excess of the investme…

Til Healthcare Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corpore Ward 3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2416/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2416/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Vs The Acit, M/S. Til Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward – 3(1), Jhaver Centre, Raja Annamalai Building, Chennai. No.72, Marshalls Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. Pan: Aabct0985H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri T. Banusekar, Ca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : 08.02.2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17.04.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 08.02.2018

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)

…in the partners’ accounts and there was no evidence that the amounts were advanced out of the borrowed amounts” The Ld.AR also placed reliance in the decision of the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., reported in 313 ITR 340 wherein it was held “Tribunal having recorded a clear finding that the assessee possessed sufficient interest-free funds of its own which were generated in the course of relevant financial year, apart from substantial shareholders fund, presumption stands established that the investments in sister concerns were made by the assessee out of intere…

Zee Media Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. Addll.CIT -RG.7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2695/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 133(6)Section 154

…was also contended that there are sufficient interest free funds available with the assessee to make investments of ₹.14,41,79,820/- and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340] it was submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that, where the assessee has own funds as well as borrowed funds the presumption can be made that the advances for non-business purposes have been made out of own funds and that the borrowed funds have not been used for this purpose. Hence disallowance of interest on borrowed funds…

ACIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Zee Media Corporation Ltd. (Formerly Known As Zee News Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2166/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari

Section 133(6)Section 154

…was also contended that there are sufficient interest free funds available with the assessee to make investments of ₹.14,41,79,820/- and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340] it was submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court held that, where the assessee has own funds as well as borrowed funds the presumption can be made that the advances for non-business purposes have been made out of own funds and that the borrowed funds have not been used for this purpose. Hence disallowance of interest on borrowed funds…

Eureka Forbes Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, RG-10, Kolkata

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

ITA 239/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Apr 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 239/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Eureka Forbes Ltd. -Vs- Acit, Range-10, Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 5767 F ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Samir Chakraborty, ARFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

…ving sufficient own funds for making the investments and hence no disallowance of interest under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules could be made in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilites and Power Ltd reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 366 ITR 505 (Bom). Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs India Gelatine and Chemicals Ltd (2015) 376 ITR 553 (Guj). Hence respectfully following the ratio laid down in the aforesaid decisions, we hold that no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules…

Tata Moters Limited (Formerly Known As Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd.), Mumbai vs. ACIT, Range.-2(3), Mumbai

In the result the ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

ITA 3336/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Pawan Singhtata Motors Limited. Dcit -2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Street, Hutatma Chowk, Vs. Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2727Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Tata Motors Limited. Acit -2(3) Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Street, Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2727Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit -2(3) Tata Motors Limited. R. No. 552, Aayakar Bhavan, Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Mumbai. Vs. Street, Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2727Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arati Vissanji (Ar) Revenue By : Shri Manjunatha Swamy (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2018

For Appellant: Ms. Arati Vissanji (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy (CIT-DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…n the exempt income. No interest disallowance was made in earlier years. The learned AR of the assessee also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of HDFC Bank Ltd versus CIT (383 ITR 529 Bom) and in Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd (313 ITR 340 Bom). On the other hand the learned AR for the revenue fairly conceded that this ground of appeal is covered in favour of assessee. 16. We have considered the rival submission of the parties and have gone through the orders of authorities below. We have noted that similar ground of appeal was raised by the assessee in earlier assessment year as…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shraddha Constructions & Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 460/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.459 & 460/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

…of interest on part borrowed capital, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is fair and reasonable as the said decision has the backing of the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. reported in 313 ITR 340 and CIT Vs. HDFC Ltd. reported in 366 ITR 505. Thus, the decision given by the CIT(A) stands confirmed. Thus, Ground Nos. 2 & 3 raised by the Revenue are dismissed.” 12. Considering the above settled nature of the issues in the assessee’s own case, we dismiss the ground Nos. 2 and 3 raised by the Revenue. 13. In the result, appeal of the Reven…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shraddha Constructions & Power Generation Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 459/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.459 & 460/Pun/2015 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

…of interest on part borrowed capital, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is fair and reasonable as the said decision has the backing of the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. reported in 313 ITR 340 and CIT Vs. HDFC Ltd. reported in 366 ITR 505. Thus, the decision given by the CIT(A) stands confirmed. Thus, Ground Nos. 2 & 3 raised by the Revenue are dismissed.” 12. Considering the above settled nature of the issues in the assessee’s own case, we dismiss the ground Nos. 2 and 3 raised by the Revenue. 13. In the result, appeal of the Reven…