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 367,181 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.

Alkyl Amines Chemicals Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2897/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2897/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/S Alkyl Amines Chemicals Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ Limited, 401-402, Income Tax – Range 10(3) V. Nirman Vypar Kendra, Mumbai. Plot No. 10, Sector-17, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400 703 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaaca6783F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 35Section 36(1)(vii)

…page 107 and details of secured and unsecured loans raised by the assessee is placed on paper book page 108-121. Thus, it was submitted that keeping in view decision of 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) 67 taxmann.com 42(Bom) , the disallowance of interest to the tune of Rs. 10,74,405/- as disallowed by authorities below is not sustainable. For the other disallowances of Rs. 1,13,010/-towards administrative and indirect expenses disallowed u/s 14A of the Act , it was submitted that reasonable disallowan…

Binani Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT-CC-Xxviii, Kolkata

ITA 2176/KOL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nds and the investment in shares of various companies. We find that the following case laws relied upon by the Learned CIT(A) in his order are well placed and are squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case :- • CIT vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (313 ITR 340 ) (Bom) Interest on borrowed capital - investments by assessee - finding that investments were from interest free funds available with assessee - borrowed capital used for purposes of business - interest deductible under Income Tax Act, s. 36(1)(iii). • G.D.Metsteel Pvt Ltd vs ACIT reported in 142 IT] 641 (Mum ITAT) Held that the investments are…

K. Raheja Corp P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

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

ITA 366/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.366/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) K. Raheja Corp Private Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Limited, Income Tax – Central V. Raheja Tower, Circle – 29, Plot No.C-30, Mumbai. G Block, Opp. Sidbi, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacp0522B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri A. Ramachandran
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…esumption will apply that the assessee has made investment in shares out of its own surplus funds unless contrary is brought on record keeping in view the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd., (2009)313 ITR 340(Bom. HC) and HDFC bank Limited v. DCIT (2016) 383 ITR 529(Bom. HC) . Hence keeping in view the factual matrix of the case as set out above, the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs. 11,26,89,134/- made by the A.O. under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of Income Tax Rules, 1962 is not sustainable and ordered to be deleted subje…

DCIT RG. 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. I.C.I.C.I. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals as well as Revenue’s appeals, all are allowed partly for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 4825/MUM/2004[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2016AY 1999-2000

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…unds. For this, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ITA No.4824 & 4825/Mum/2004 the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 314 (Bom.). It was contended by the learned Counsel for the assessee that the entire interest expenses are to be allowed as expenses and no interest expenses to be allocated as the investment is made out of assessee’s own funds. She referred to the Tribunal’s decision in assessee’s own case in assessment year 1997-98 in ITA No.5424/Mum/2001 wherein t…

DCIT RG. 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. I.C.I.C.I. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals as well as Revenue’s appeals, all are allowed partly for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 4824/MUM/2004[1997-1998]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2016AY 1997-1998

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…unds. For this, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ITA No.4824 & 4825/Mum/2004 the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 314 (Bom.). It was contended by the learned Counsel for the assessee that the entire interest expenses are to be allowed as expenses and no interest expenses to be allocated as the investment is made out of assessee’s own funds. She referred to the Tribunal’s decision in assessee’s own case in assessment year 1997-98 in ITA No.5424/Mum/2001 wherein t…

Icici Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Range 3(1)

In the result, assessee’s appeals as well as Revenue’s appeals, all are allowed partly for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 4589/MUM/2004[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2016AY 1998-99

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

…unds. For this, the learned Counsel for the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ITA No.4824 & 4825/Mum/2004 the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 314 (Bom.). It was contended by the learned Counsel for the assessee that the entire interest expenses are to be allowed as expenses and no interest expenses to be allocated as the investment is made out of assessee’s own funds. She referred to the Tribunal’s decision in assessee’s own case in assessment year 1997-98 in ITA No.5424/Mum/2001 wherein t…

ITO 10(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Jpa Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4640/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Assessment Year:2011-12 Income Tax Officer-10(2)(1), M/S Jpa Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Room No.408, 4Th Floor, 102, Man Gouse, S.V. Road, बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, Vile Parle (West), Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400056 Mumbai-400020 "नधा"रती / Assessee राज"व / Revenue P.A. No.Aabcj7151K

Section 14A

…t only in a situation where he is not satisfied with the correctness of 5 M/s JPA Solutions Pvt. Ltd. the accounts/claim of the assessee. My view find support from the decision in CIT vs Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 158 (P & H), Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), DCIT vs Jindal Photo Ltd. (Del. Trib.) and Shiva Industries & Holdings Ltd. vs ACIT (2011) 59 DTR 182. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. categorically held that if interest free funds are available with the assessee, which are sufficient to meet the investment and at the same time assessee raised a l…

M/S. V.K. International, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4178/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddyassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-3 : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2010-11 V.K. International, Vs. DCIT, A-11-12, Amrit Nagar, Circle-32(1), Behind NDSE Part-I, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAAFV4599H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi & Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAs Department By : Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 31.08.2016 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A) dated 21.5.2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. There are only two…

D.C.I.T CC - V, Kolkata vs. M/S Sai Iron India Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1087/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tulsiyan, FCA, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 43B

…t paid Rs.10.7 crore at a time to the said party which is evident from the ledger account. The appellant had given as well as taken the advance from the said patty. The reliance is placed on the decisions in the case of CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and CIT vs Britannia Industries Ltd 280 ITR 525 (Cal). In view of the above, the appellant pleaded that the AO be directed to delete the disallowance made by him on account of payment of interest. 17. The CIT-A considering the submissions of the Assessee and disposed of the appeal by stating as under:- I have considered the submissions o…

Saurashtra Fuels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 7452/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7452/Mum/2013 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बनधम/ M/S Saurashtra Fuels Pvt Ltd- Asstt Commissioner Of Income 93-C, Mittal Tower, Tax, Circle-3(3), Vs. Nariman Point, Room No.609, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “ई” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7452/Mum/2013 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) बनधम/ M/s Saurashtra Fuels Pvt Ltd- Asstt Commissioner of Income 93-C, Mittal Tower, Tax, Circle-3(3), Vs. Nariman Point, Room No.609, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AAACS7271G अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Assessee by Shri B V Jhaveri प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Shri Manjunatha Swamy सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 9.06.2016 घोषणा की ता…

Mohanlal M Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 7181/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Shailendra Kumar Yadav, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7181/Mum/2010 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2001-02) बनधम/ Shri Mohanlal M Shah, Income Tax Officer Ward 601, Laxmi Villa, 19(2)(4), Vs. 45-Tagore Road, Piramal Chamberes, Santacruz (W), Lalbaug, Mumbai-400054 Mumbai-400012

Section 10Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “बी” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7181/Mum/2010 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2001-02) बनधम/ Shri Mohanlal M Shah, Income Tax Officer Ward 601, Laxmi Villa, 19(2)(4), Vs. 45-Tagore Road, Piramal Chamberes, Santacruz (W), Lalbaug, Mumbai-400054 Mumbai-400012 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ PAN : AABPS8064P अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Assessee by Ms.Nikita Agarwal प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Revenue by Shri Shivaji B Ghode सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 3.8.2016 घोषणा की तारीख /Da…

Yogesh B. Dharnidharka, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 532/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Raoi.T.A. No.532/M/2015 (Assessment Year: 2010-2011) फनाभ/ Yogesh B. Dharnidharka, Acit-4(2), C/O. Karnavat & Co., R.No.642, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 2A Kitab Mahal, 1 St Floor, M.K. Road, 192 Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 001. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aabpd4545L (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Sunil Hirawat प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Oaarsi Prasad, Jcit

For Appellant: Shri Sunil HirawatFor Respondent: Shri OAarsi Prasad, JCIT
Section 14ASection 250(6)

…d the no borrowed funds were utilised for making exempt income yielding investments. He further submitted that the CIT (A) has not considered the binding judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom.), which is relevant for the proposition that the presumption of assessee investing in shares out of interest free funds should go in favour of the assessee. 4. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the orders of the order of the CIT (A) in general and the contents of para 3.2 in particular, I find the same is in not in tune with…

Centrum Capital Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 26/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri, A.R. with Surendra Nijsure, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sujit Bangar, D.R
Section 14A

…were more than the investments made and therefore in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of 3 ITA Nos.26 & 27/M/2015 & ITA Nos.18 & 19/M/2015 M/s. Centrum Capital Ltd. “CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.” (2009) 313 ITR 340 there was a presumption that own funds of the assessee were used for investments and therefore no disallowance on account of interest expenditure was attracted. Further, a plea was also taken that the assessee during the year had also earned interest income and that for computation of interest expenditure, the netting of the interest income and i…

ACIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Centrum Capital Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 18/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri, A.R. with Surendra Nijsure, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sujit Bangar, D.R
Section 14A

…were more than the investments made and therefore in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of 3 ITA Nos.26 & 27/M/2015 & ITA Nos.18 & 19/M/2015 M/s. Centrum Capital Ltd. “CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.” (2009) 313 ITR 340 there was a presumption that own funds of the assessee were used for investments and therefore no disallowance on account of interest expenditure was attracted. Further, a plea was also taken that the assessee during the year had also earned interest income and that for computation of interest expenditure, the netting of the interest income and i…

Renu S. Kochhar, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands allowed

ITA 74/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Nabin Kumar Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri M. SubramanianFor Respondent: Shri Airiju Jaikaran
Section 36(1)(iii)

…the purpose of business, they have to be allowed. In support of his contention, learned Authorised Representative relied upon the following decisions:– i) S.A. Builders v/s CIT, [2007] 288 ITR 001 (SC); and ii) CIT v/s Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). 6. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand, relying upon the observations of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) submitted, the assessee having diverted interest bearing funds for non–business purpose disallowance of interest expenditure is justified. 7. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the mate…

Dhirajlal Morarji, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 13(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 234/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Nabin Kumar Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. Amrita Singh
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NABIN KUMAR PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.234/Mum./2014 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) M/s. Dhirajlal Morarji Anand Building 82/84, Kazi Sayed Street ……………. Appellant Mumbai 400 003 PAN AAAFD0750C v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–13(2)(3), Aayakar Bhawan ……………. Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Vipul Joshi Revenue by : Smt. Amrita Singh Date of Hearing – 10.08.2016 Date of Order – 19.08.2016 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. Aforesaid appeal of the assessee is directed against the order d…

M/S Tally Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1364/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Aug 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Sonde, Senior CounselFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 928Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH “ B ” BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.(T.P) A. No.1364/Bang/2011 (Assessment Year : 2007-08) M/s. Tally Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Nos.23 & 24, Circle 12(1), Bangalore. AMR Tech Park II, Hongasandra, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore-560 068 PAN AAACP 7879D Appellant Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Arvind Sonde, Senior Counsel. Respondent By : Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II (D.R) Date of Hearing : 21.6.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 19.8.2016. O R D E R Per Shri Vijay Pal Rao, J.M.…

Jhp Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwaljhp Securities Ltd., Dev Neo Vikram, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income “B”Wing, 2Nd Floor, Sahakar Nagar Tax, Range-4 (3), Aayakar Bhavan, 6Th Floor, M. K. Marg, Mumbai 20 Chs, Above Audi Car Showroom, New Link Road, Andheri (West), Mumbai 53 Pan:Aaacj 2847 H Appellant .. Respondent .. Appellant By Sri Dev Datta Mainkar, Ar Respondent By .. Sri Durga Dutt, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing .. 18-08-16 Date Of Pronouncement .. 18-08-16 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Cit (A)-8, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit (A)-8/Cir.4/165/2013-14 Dated 17-10-2014. Assessment Was Framed By The Acit- 4(3), Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2010-11 Vide His Order U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”) Dated 22-03-2013. 2. The First Issue In This Appeal Of The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The Cit (A) Confirming The Disallowance Of Expenses Relatable To Exempted Income By Invoking The Provisions Of Section 14A Of The Act Read With Rule 8D (2) (Ii) Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 (Hereinafter “The Rules”) At Rs.10,49,330/-.

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…lied Rule 8D of the Rules mechanically and without recording of any satisfaction. The learned Counsel for the assessee before the CIT (A) also relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and also recent judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom.). 3 But, neither the CIT (A) nor the AO has dealt with the issue of availability of funds and the CIT (A) just confirmed the addition. The CIT (A) only recorded the following findings in Para 2.3 of his order:- “2.3 Duri…

Runwal Developement P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No 4824/Mum/2014 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4824/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80G

…nds for making the investment hence the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of Income Tax Rules, 1962 should not be made. The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340(Bom.) and the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT, Trichur vs. The Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. and requested that interest expenditure should not be considered for the purpose of working out disallowance u/s.14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the contentions of the assessee and h…

Laxmi Ventures (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7025/MUM/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.7025 & 7026/Mum/2014 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2001-02 & 2008-09) Laxmi Ventures (India) Pvt Ltd, बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge Arcade, Circle 6(3), Vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400026 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Haridas Bhat
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…han investments and in case, the investments are made in the subsidiaries/associate concerns delete the disallowance completely. While coming to this conclusion, we get support from the decision in the cases of CIT V/s RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom), CIT V/s HDFC BANK LTD. [2014] 366 ITR 505 (Bom) wherein it has been held that if the assessee has interest free and interest bearing funds for making investment and if the interest free funds are more than the interest bearing funds, then no disallowance under rule 8D (2)(ii) of the Rules is required. In case of strategic investments in su…