CIT v. Tin Box Company

260 ITR 637High Court2003#1417 most cited

What is CIT v. Tin Box Company authority for?

When an assessee possesses sufficient interest-free funds, it is presumed that any interest-free advances or investments made are from these funds, preventing disallowance of interest under Section 36(1)(iii). This principle applies if own capital and interest-free loans exceed the interest-free advances given.

80

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tin Box Company · 260 ITR 637 · Section 36(1)(iii) · interest free advances · disallowance of interest · borrowed capital · presumption of own funds · commercial expediency · mixed funds · availability of interest-free capital · Section 14A disallowance · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 143(1)Section 264Section 56(2)(viib)Section 142(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

Issues it is cited on

nav methodinterest free advancesdcf methodsection 288section 36(1)(iii)accumulated profitssection 56(2)(viib)valuation of sharescommercial expediencysection 264section 33advance tax

Judgments citing CIT v. Tin Box Company

Asst CIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…ub 21,93,36,97,702 33,19,19,99,686 5,52,92,62,288 Total 21,93,36,97,702 33,19,19,99,686 5,52,92,62,288 Average Investment — 27,56,28,48,694 — 9.16. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Tin Box Co. [2003] 260 ITR 637 wherein the Hon’ble High Court dealt with disallowance of part of interest on borrowed capital as the assessee therein had advanced interest free loans to its sister concern. 9.17. The issue of whether 14A is applicable, to a bank like assessee which has sufficient own interest free funds vis-à-vis the investment against which tax free income is…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…ub 21,93,36,97,702 33,19,19,99,686 5,52,92,62,288 Total 21,93,36,97,702 33,19,19,99,686 5,52,92,62,288 Average Investment — 27,56,28,48,694 — 9.16. The assessee placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Tin Box Co. [2003] 260 ITR 637 wherein the Hon’ble High Court dealt with disallowance of part of interest on borrowed capital as the assessee therein had advanced interest free loans to its sister concern. 9.17. The issue of whether 14A is applicable, to a bank like assessee which has sufficient own interest free funds vis-à-vis the investment against which tax free income is…

M/S. Bank of American, N.A, Mumbai vs. The Jt DIT (I.T)3, Mumbai

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

ITA 4154/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2026AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 44C

…rom the "owned funds" and not from the "borrowed funds". Though stated in the context of allowance of interest expenditure on borrowed funds and diversion of borrowed funds to sister concerns, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Tin Box Co. Pvt. Ltd. (260 ITR 637) has clearly held that capital and reserves of the assessee, if exceeded the amounts advanced to sister concerns, no disallowance can be made of the interest if the Department fails to point out any specific interest bearing funds, which has been diverted by the assessee to its sister concern. The fact that capital and interest free loans of the…

The Dy DIT (I.T) 1(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bank of America N.A., Mumbai

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

ITA 4090/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2026AY 2000-2001

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kantshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 44C

…rom the "owned funds" and not from the "borrowed funds". Though stated in the context of allowance of interest expenditure on borrowed funds and diversion of borrowed funds to sister concerns, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Tin Box Co. Pvt. Ltd. (260 ITR 637) has clearly held that capital and reserves of the assessee, if exceeded the amounts advanced to sister concerns, no disallowance can be made of the interest if the Department fails to point out any specific interest bearing funds, which has been diverted by the assessee to its sister concern. The fact that capital and interest free loans of the…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1737/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 11

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet investment, presumption is that investments in subsidiar…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1736/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 11

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet investment, presumption is that investments in subsidiar…

M/S.Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1735/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 11

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet investment, presumption is that investments in subsidiar…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for A

ITA 1734/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Y.Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Shiva Srinivas, CIT
Section 11

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet investment, presumption is that investments in subsidiar…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vodafone Essar Digilink Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1158/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved & Shri Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "J" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Vodafone Digilink Limited (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Digilink Limited) C-48, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase – II, New Delhi – 110020. Maharashtra. [PAN: AAACA3202D] …………. Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 26(2), New Delhi …………. Respondent Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 26(2), New Delhi …………. Appellant Vs Vodafone Digilink Limited (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Digilink Limited) C-48, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase – II, New Delhi – 110020. Maharasht…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles (P) Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 857/CHNY/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet ITA Nos.854 to 857/Chny/2025 (AYs 2008-09 to 2011-12)…

M/S. Thruvalluvar Textiles (P) Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 856/CHNY/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet ITA Nos.854 to 857/Chny/2025 (AYs 2008-09 to 2011-12)…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles (P) Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Salem

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 855/CHNY/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet ITA Nos.854 to 857/Chny/2025 (AYs 2008-09 to 2011-12)…

M/S. Thiruvalluvar Textiles (P) Ltd., Rasipuram vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Salem

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 854/CHNY/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jul 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

For Appellant: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 264

…tment in its subsidiary M/s.TNMPL . For such a preposition, we rely on the following Hon’ble High Courts decisions: • CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) • CIT v. Hotel Savera (1999) 239 ITR 795 (Mad) • CIT v. TIN. Box Co. (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del) 11. The ratio laid by the Hon’ble High Courts (supra) been concurred by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT (LTU) v. Reliance Industries Ltd., reported in 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it was held by their Lordships ‘ …… when interest-free funds was available with assessee is sufficient to meet ITA Nos.854 to 857/Chny/2025 (AYs 2008-09 to 2011-12)…

DCIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Hebe Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2455/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153Section 153ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…served that there was a clear-cut finding by the AO that the interest bearing funds were utilised for non-business purpose. It has been also observed that "We find that in the case of Tin Box Company [Commissioner of Income Tax & Another v. Tin Box Co: (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del)] the capital of the firm and interest free unsecured loans available with the appellant far exceeded the amount advanced to the sister concern in all the years under appeal. The question as to whether the loans to the sister concern were extended for commercial expediency or not was neither raised nor examined in that case. Considering the…

Sapphire Foods India Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 3579/MUM/2024[AY 2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2025

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…Court in case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd reported in 224 ITR 667 and decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Woolcombers of India Ltd reported in 134 ITR 219. • Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of the Tin Box Co. reported in 260 ITR 637 • decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of Gujarat Power Corp Ltd., vide order dated 28/03/2011 • decision of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of Hero Cycles Ltd reported in 323 ITR 518; • The assessee had also relied on decision of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment A 2006-07 and 2007-08 wherein the disallo…

Jagson International Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-13(1), Delhi

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

ITA 902/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Jagson International Ltd., Vs Dcit, H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Jangpura Extension, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Jagson International Ltd., H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Delhi Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Saxena, Ms Sumangla Saxena & Shri Shyam Sunder, Advocates Revenue By : Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 407

…nts." Further reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 36(1)(iii) of the Act without establishing the nexus between the payment of interest and loan advanced. a) ITA No. 1231 with CM 16759/2009 dated 02.12.2009 CIT vs. Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. b) 260 ITR 637 (Dei) CIT vs. Tin Box Co. c) 177 Taxman 300 (Del) CIT vs. DCM Ltd. d) 184 Taxman 352 (Del) CIT vs. H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. e) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. f) 29 SOT 531 (Mum) Metro Exports Ltd. vs. ITO g) 20 SOT 47 (Mum) Tata Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT h) 194 CTR 451 (All) CIT vs. RadicoKhaitan Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) held…

JCIT Circle-13(1), New Delhi vs. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1303/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2017-18 Jagson International Ltd., Vs Dcit, H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Jangpura Extension, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dcit, Vs. Jagson International Ltd., H-35, 1St Floor, Circle-13(1), Delhi Jangpura Extension, New Delhi – 110 014. Pan: Aaacj2147A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rajiv Saxena, Ms Sumangla Saxena & Shri Shyam Sunder, Advocates Revenue By : Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv SaxenaFor Respondent: Mohd. Gayasuddin Ansari, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 407

…nts." Further reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements: 36(1)(iii) of the Act without establishing the nexus between the payment of interest and loan advanced. a) ITA No. 1231 with CM 16759/2009 dated 02.12.2009 CIT vs. Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. b) 260 ITR 637 (Dei) CIT vs. Tin Box Co. c) 177 Taxman 300 (Del) CIT vs. DCM Ltd. d) 184 Taxman 352 (Del) CIT vs. H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. e) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. f) 29 SOT 531 (Mum) Metro Exports Ltd. vs. ITO g) 20 SOT 47 (Mum) Tata Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT h) 194 CTR 451 (All) CIT vs. RadicoKhaitan Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) held…

Namdeo Indarrao Gore, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 343/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 14ASection 250

…on, the Hon’ble High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 627 (SC). Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Dehi High Court in CIT vs. Tin Box Company (2003) 260 ITR 637 (Del), holding that when 5 Namdeo Indarrao Gore the capital and interest free unsecured loan with the assessee far exceeded the interest free loan advanced to the sister concern, disallowance of part of interest out of total interest paid by the assessee to the bank was not justified. More recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT(LTU) VS.…

Jwil Infra Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi

ITA 7789/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)

…explanation of the commercial expediency. Reliance was also placed on the following judgment : “1. S.A.Builders Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) 2. Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 (SC) 3. CIT vs. Orissa Cement Ltd. 252 ITR 878 (Del.) 4. CIT vs. Tin Box Co. 260 ITR 637 (Del) 5. PCIT vs. Basti Sugars Mills Ltd. 408 ITR 184 (Delhi)] 6. DCIT vs. Raghuvir Singh Synthetics Ltd. 397 ITR 1 7. CIT (LTU) Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 8. CIT vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. 88 ITR 192(SC) 6. Giving thoughtful consideration to the matter on record and the submissions in regard to the ground presses to be decided…

DCIT, Circle- 13(1), New Delhi vs. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5375/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. C. N. Prasaddr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 115VSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 40

…o interest has been paid, no disallowance can be made by invoking section 36(1)(iii) of the Act without establishing the nexus between the payment of interest and loan advanced. a) ITA No. 1231 with CM 16759/2009 dated 02.12.2009 CIT vs. Jet Air Pvt. Ltd. b) 260 ITR 637 (Dei) CIT vs. Tin Box Co. c) 177 Taxman 300 (Del) CIT vs. DCM Ltd. d) 184 Taxman 352 (Del) CIT vs. H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. e) 313 ITR 340 (Bom) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. f) 29 SOT 531 (Mum) Metro Exports Ltd. vs. ITO g) 20 SOT 47 (Mum) Tata Finance Ltd. vs. ACIT h) 194 CTR 451 (All) CIT vs. RadicoKhaitan Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) held…