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 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 vs. Sharp Designer and Engineers (India) Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1262/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2263/Pun/2014 आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

…round the fact of existence of “interest free own funds” of the assessee and also the presumption laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. reported in 368 ITR 377 and CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340. Bringing our attention to the financial statements placed at page 72 of the paper book, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has excess interest free funds. Further, Ld. AR submitted that assessee has the capital and reserves of Rs.8.23 crores (rounded off) against which the assessee invested only Rs.2.91 crores (rounded off). The…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Sharp Designers & Engineers India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2283/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2263/Pun/2014 आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

…round the fact of existence of “interest free own funds” of the assessee and also the presumption laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. reported in 368 ITR 377 and CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340. Bringing our attention to the financial statements placed at page 72 of the paper book, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has excess interest free funds. Further, Ld. AR submitted that assessee has the capital and reserves of Rs.8.23 crores (rounded off) against which the assessee invested only Rs.2.91 crores (rounded off). The…

Sharp Designers and Engineers India P. Ltd., Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2263/PUN/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2263/Pun/2014 आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 14ASection 40A(2)(b)Section 80ASection 80I

…round the fact of existence of “interest free own funds” of the assessee and also the presumption laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. reported in 368 ITR 377 and CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340. Bringing our attention to the financial statements placed at page 72 of the paper book, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has excess interest free funds. Further, Ld. AR submitted that assessee has the capital and reserves of Rs.8.23 crores (rounded off) against which the assessee invested only Rs.2.91 crores (rounded off). The…

DCIT, Madurai vs. M/S. Rajapalayam Mills Ltd., Rajapalayam

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3165/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3165/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Rajapalayam Mills Ltd., Income Tax, V. Rajapalayam Mills Premises, Corporate Circle – 2, Pac Ramasamy Raja Salai, Madurai. Rajapalayam. Pan : Aaacr 8897 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Madhavan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri V. Jagadisan, CA
Section 14A

…erest free funds were available more than the investment, therefore, there cannot be any disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. The CIT(Appeals) has also placed reliance on the judgement of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Limited (313 ITR 340). 4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. Admittedly, the assessee had surplus funds of its own. It is not disputed that the assessee was having ₹43,451.32 lakhs. The investment is only ₹4417.20 lakhs. It is also not in dispute that the investment was 4 I.T.A. No.3165/Mds/…

DCIT 13(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Technotrade Impex India P Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3835/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 115JSection 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 234ASection 234B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI Before Shri Mahavir Singh (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A Nos.1344 to 1346 /Mum/2016 (Assessment years: 2008-09 to 2010-11) Geltec Pvt Ltd vs ACIT, Cent.Cir.20, Mumbai Capsulation Premises 1st Floor, Sion Trombay Road, Deonar, Mumbai-88 PAN : AAACB1782H APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri D.V. Lakhani Respondent by Shri C.S. Gulati Date of hearing 11-01 -2018 Date of pronouncement 24-01-2018 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate but identica…

Lakshmi Builder & Developers, Mumbai vs. ACIT 31(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2997/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT

…M/s. Tata Morots Ltd. contention, the learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions:– i) HDFC Bank Ltd. v/s CIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.); and iii) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). 24. The learned Departmental Representative, though, supported the decision of the first appellate authority in respect of disallowance of interest expenditure, however, so far as disallowance of other expenditure is concerned, he submitted, the first appellate authority was not justified in deleting the disallowance of other expenditure…

Geltec P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 20, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1344/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 115JSection 132Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 234ASection 234B

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI Before Shri Mahavir Singh (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND Shri G Manjunatha (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A Nos.1344 to 1346 /Mum/2016 (Assessment years: 2008-09 to 2010-11) Geltec Pvt Ltd vs ACIT, Cent.Cir.20, Mumbai Capsulation Premises 1st Floor, Sion Trombay Road, Deonar, Mumbai-88 PAN : AAACB1782H APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT Appellant by Shri D.V. Lakhani Respondent by Shri C.S. Gulati Date of hearing 11-01 -2018 Date of pronouncement 24-01-2018 O R D E R Per G Manjunatha, AM : These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate but identica…

ACIT (OSD) - 2(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Tata Finance Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 2997/MUM/2006[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jan 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh Vyas, Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Manjunatha Swamy, CIT

…her, in support of his contention, the learned Sr. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the following decisions:– i) HDFC Bank Ltd. v/s CIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s HDFC Bank Ltd., 366 ITR 505 (Bom.); and iii) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). 24. The learned Departmental Representative, though, supported the decision of the first appellate authority in respect of disallowance of interest expenditure, however, so far as disallowance of other expenditure is concerned, he submitted, the first appellate authority 13 M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. was not justified in deleting the disallo…

Spaco Technologies (India) P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2882/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2882/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Spaco Technologies बिाम/ Dcit, Circle 5(3), Aayakar (India) P. Ltd., Bhavan, Mumbai 901, Prasad Chambers, V. Opera House, Mumbai- 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcs5307E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. M.C. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal
Section 10(33)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “C” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2882/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. Spaco Technologies बिाम/ DCIT, Circle 5(3), Aayakar (India) P. Ltd., Bhavan, Mumbai 901, Prasad Chambers, v. Opera House, Mumbai- 400004 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AABCS5307E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri. M.C. Naniwadekar Revenue by : Shri. Rajat Mittal सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing : 16-01-2018 घोषणा की तारीख…

ITO 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Millennium Appliances India Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5149/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-3(2)(2), M/S Millenium Room No.673, 6Th Floor, Appliances India Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 171-C, Mittal Court, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaccm7838D

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 153A

…are Rs.55.90 crores, whereas, the strategic investment made in the group company was to the tune of Rs.37 crores. The case of the assessee is covered by the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), wherein, it was held that where the assessee has sufficient interest free funds for making the investment, it could not be presumed that the investment was made out of other funds, thus, no disallowance u/s 14A is warranted. The Ld. Assessing Officer invoked the provision of section 14A of the Act assuming that expenses must have been…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Bhagwat Chaudhary, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 633/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.629 To 634/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Vijaya B. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Devendra Kulkarni
Section 143(3)

…6.2 Total investment in the firms stood at Rs.24,48,730 and apart from that all other investments were personal investments of the appellant in the land, house property and saving bank account. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), held that if there be interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investment 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. For the year under consideration, personal investment of the appellant are only Rs.8,54,311/- which a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Bhagwat Chaudhary, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 632/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.629 To 634/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Vijaya B. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Devendra Kulkarni
Section 143(3)

…6.2 Total investment in the firms stood at Rs.24,48,730 and apart from that all other investments were personal investments of the appellant in the land, house property and saving bank account. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), held that if there be interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investment 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. For the year under consideration, personal investment of the appellant are only Rs.8,54,311/- which a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Bhagwat Chaudhary, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 631/PUN/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.629 To 634/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Vijaya B. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Devendra Kulkarni
Section 143(3)

…6.2 Total investment in the firms stood at Rs.24,48,730 and apart from that all other investments were personal investments of the appellant in the land, house property and saving bank account. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), held that if there be interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investment 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. For the year under consideration, personal investment of the appellant are only Rs.8,54,311/- which a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Bhagwat Chaudhary, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 630/PUN/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.629 To 634/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Vijaya B. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Devendra Kulkarni
Section 143(3)

…6.2 Total investment in the firms stood at Rs.24,48,730 and apart from that all other investments were personal investments of the appellant in the land, house property and saving bank account. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), held that if there be interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investment 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. For the year under consideration, personal investment of the appellant are only Rs.8,54,311/- which a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Mahesh Bhagwat Chaudhary, Jalgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 629/PUN/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita Nos.629 To 634/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 To 2011-12 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T. Vijaya B. ReddyFor Respondent: Shri Devendra Kulkarni
Section 143(3)

…6.2 Total investment in the firms stood at Rs.24,48,730 and apart from that all other investments were personal investments of the appellant in the land, house property and saving bank account. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility & Power 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), held that if there be interest free funds available to an assessee sufficient to meet its investment 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. For the year under consideration, personal investment of the appellant are only Rs.8,54,311/- which a…

ITO, WD-12(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Shee Sen Leather Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue (Ground No

ITA 1044/KOL/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1044/Kol/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) I.T.O, Ward-12(4), Kolkata Vs. M/S Shee Sen Leather Pvt. Ltd. 114/C, Matheswartolla Road, Aayakarbhavan (7Th Floor), P-7, Kolkata – 700 046. Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 69. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs 3938 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. Cit(Dr) Respondent By : Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate & V.N. Purohit, Fca सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Directed Against An Order Passed By The Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.111/Xii/Cir-12/13-14, Dated 19.02.2014, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.143(3) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.03.2013. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows: “1. That Is The Facts & In Law Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Amounting To Rs.29,84,786/- Made The Ao On Account Of Difference In Valuation In Closing Stock & G.P. On Unaccounted Sales Of Chemicals Which Was Detected On The Basis Of Findings Of Survey U/S 133A.

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate & V.N. Purohit, FCA
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s, there is nothing on record to suggest that the assessee had incurred any expenditure for the purpose of earning any exempt income. The assessee also relied on the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), wherein it was held that if the assessee had sufficient interest free fund to meet its tax free investment yielding exempt income, then it could be presumed that such investment have been made from interest free fund and not from loan fund. In the instant case, no interest bearing loan was used for investment in tax free income yielding i…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Trading & Holdings Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 4259/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4259/Mum/2016 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Acit-3(1)(2) बिधम/ M/S. Edelweiss Trading & Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Holding Ltd. (Formerly Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Edelweiss Commodities 400020 Ltd.) 1, Edelweiss House, Off, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz (E) Mumbai- 400098 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabce3819M (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Rajan Vora सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.10.2017 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17. 01.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 16.03.2016 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 8, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:- “1. "On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit{A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.12,74,59,362/- Made By Assessing Officer On Account Of Mark To Market Loss A.Y.2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 10(34)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…d as stock in trade no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made. It was also noticed that the assessee’s own share capital and reserves is much higher than investment. The CIT(A) has relied upon the judgments cited as CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340)etc. mentioned in the said order. The appellant has suo-moto disallowed the expenses to the tune of Rs.7,88,606/-. Nothing came into notice that the facts are distinguishable at this stage. The CIT(A) has passed the order on the basis of judicial pronouncement mentioned therein. Moreover, Hon’ble ITAT has also decided the matter of controversy in…

Dy.C.I.T.1(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Navbharat Press, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/BIL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri N.S.Saini & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judical Member Dcit-1(1), Raipur-1 Vs Navbharat Press, Press Complex, G.E.Road, Raipur(C.G.)-492001 Pan No. : Aadfn 0350 R (Appellant) Tsednepser .. Revenue By : Shri Ajit Kumar Laskar, Dr Assessee By : None(Written Submission) Date Of Hearing : 12/01/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 15/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri N.S.Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Raipur, Dated 12.06.2014 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds :- “1. Whether In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Of Interest U/S.36(1)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Of Rs.41,54,811/- As Interest Bearing Funds Were Used For Non-Business Purposes.” 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm Derives Income From Printing & Publishing Of Hindi Daily Newspaper “Nav Bharat” & English Daily “Central Chronicle” From Raipur. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,85,77,530/-. Thereafter The Ao Framed The Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.2,27,32,341/-.

For Appellant: None(Written Submission)For Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Laskar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 44A

…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 finds were sufficient to meet the investments." Decisio…

DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Eih Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 153/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…r making investments. Hence there cannot be any disallowance of interest under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules by applying the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd reported in (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) wherein it was held that the presumption would go in favour of the assessee if the interest free funds are more than the loans taken by the assessee , then it would be presumed that the investments were made out of own funds of the assessee. The said ratio would squarely apply to the facts of the instant case. Hence we hold that the disallo…

Eih Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-8(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 110/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 153/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata -Vs- M/S Eih Limited [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 110/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Eih Limited -Vs- Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaace 6898 B] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri Kanchun Kaushal,Ar For The Department : Shri G.Mallikarjuna, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 12.01.2018 Order Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Kanchun Kaushal,ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Mallikarjuna, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…r making investments. Hence there cannot be any disallowance of interest under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules by applying the ratio laid down in the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd reported in (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) wherein it was held that the presumption would go in favour of the assessee if the interest free funds are more than the loans taken by the assessee , then it would be presumed that the investments were made out of own funds of the assessee. The said ratio would squarely apply to the facts of the instant case. Hence we hold that the disallo…