CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.

354 ITR 630High Court2013#589 most cited

What is CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee possesses sufficient interest-free own funds to cover investments yielding exempt income, it is presumed that such investments are made from these own funds, precluding any disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A, even when borrowed funds are also available.

166

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd. · 354 ITR 630 · Section 14A · disallowance under Section 14A · interest expenditure · exempt income · sufficient own funds · interest-free funds · presumption of funds · nexus with borrowed funds · mixed funds · Gujarat High Court

Also reported as

44 Taxmann.com 441

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 115JBSection 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)

Issues it is cited on

written down valuedisallowance under section 14arule of consistencydisallowance u/s 14asection 14asection 36section 37double taxationprevious yearsection 80transfercompany

Judgments citing CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.

The ACIT, Patan Circle, Patan vs. M/S. Rajena Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 674/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 584/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 M/S. Rajena Agro Products Pvt. Ltd. D.C.I.T., C/O. Rangwala & Co., Vs. Patan Circle, 305, Sakar-1, Patan. Opp. Nehru Bridge, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sadhwani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R
Section 40

…are mixed funds, then the presumption would be that the advances have been given out of interest free funds. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: “It was noted from records that the assessee was having share holding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspe…

Rajena Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., Patan vs. The Dy.CIT, Patan Circle, Patan

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 584/AHD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 584/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 M/S. Rajena Agro Products Pvt. Ltd. D.C.I.T., C/O. Rangwala & Co., Vs. Patan Circle, 305, Sakar-1, Patan. Opp. Nehru Bridge, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Sadhwani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr.D.R
Section 40

…are mixed funds, then the presumption would be that the advances have been given out of interest free funds. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: “It was noted from records that the assessee was having share holding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspe…

M/S P.M. Diesels Pvt. Ltd., Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Asstt. Commr. Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/RJT/2020[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot26 Jul 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member ITA No. 66 /Rjt/2020 Assessment Year 2014-15 M/s. P.M. Diesels Pvt. The ACIT, Ltd., Rajkot Circle-2(1), PAN: AABCN5691G Vs Rajkot (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Deepak Rindani, A.R. Revenue by: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 29-06-2022 Date of pronouncement : 27-07-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:- This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2014-15, arises from the order of the CIT(A), Rajkot-2 dated 17-01-2020, in proceedings under section 25…

Adani Enterprises Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

Appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 2035/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedasstt. Sr.No.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Vartik Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, C.I.T.DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 35Section 92C

…funds then the power of presumption would be that the investments have been made out of interest free funds. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having share holding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspec…

The JCIT (OSD), Cirelce-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Mieza School Pvt. Ltd(Formerly Known As Arihant Arcade Pvt. Ltd), Surat

In the result, ground number 2 of the Revenue’s appeal is hereby dismissed

ITA 772/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT-D.R
Section 14ASection 68

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member ITA No. 772 /Ahd/2019 Assessment Year 2012-13 JCIT(OSD), Mieza School Pvt. Ltd. Circle-1(1)(1), (Formerly Known as Ahmedabad Vs Arihant Arcade Pvt. Ltd.), (Appellant) F.P. No. 29 Virtuous Retail, Nr. Dumas Resort, Surat Dumas Road, Magdalla, Surat-395007 PAN: AAGCA2476H (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P.D. Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Mohd Usman, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 02-06-2022 Date of pronouncement : 24-06-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUD…

Icici Home Finance Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1325/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: R.A. Dhyani
Section 14ASection 201Section 250Section 36(1)(viii)Section 36(1)(viil)Section 37(1)

…VI of the Audited Accounts for the year ended 31.3.2009. • Increase in capital and reserves during the relevant year — Rs.356.42 crores B/S. CIT v HDFC Bank, 366 ITR 505 (Born) CIT v Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Born) CIT v Torrent Power Ltd. 354 ITR 630 (Guj) B. Interest received Rs. 1283.38 crores exceeded interest paid Rs.989.19 Cr. Sch. X & XII. No disallowance based on principle of netting; reliance placed on: DCIT v Trade Apartment Ltd. ITA NO.1277/Ko1/2011-para 4 ITO v Karnavati Petrochem Pvt. Ltd. ITA NO.2228/AHD/2012 -para 7 Morgan Stanley India Securities ITA No.5072/M/2005 and 6774/M/0…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S Atul Auto Limited, Shapar.Veraval

The appeal is allowed

ITA 251/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

…. Therefore, most respectfully following the decision of Jurisdictional Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT V. UTI Bank Ltd. [2013]32 taxmann.com 370, CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd. [2014] 363 TTR 474 and CIT v. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I.) Ltd. [2014] 221 Taxmann 109 I am of the view that no disallowance is warranted in the present scenario however, the ITA Nos.214&251/Rjt/2016 Atul Auto Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year – 2012-13 appellant has suo-moto disallowed a sum of Rs. 3,35,877/- and this does not call for any interference and hence the disallowance made by the appellant is sustained. Appellant has also co…

Atul Auto Limited, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeal is allowed

ITA 214/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

…. Therefore, most respectfully following the decision of Jurisdictional Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT V. UTI Bank Ltd. [2013]32 taxmann.com 370, CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd. [2014] 363 TTR 474 and CIT v. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I.) Ltd. [2014] 221 Taxmann 109 I am of the view that no disallowance is warranted in the present scenario however, the ITA Nos.214&251/Rjt/2016 Atul Auto Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year – 2012-13 appellant has suo-moto disallowed a sum of Rs. 3,35,877/- and this does not call for any interference and hence the disallowance made by the appellant is sustained. Appellant has also co…

ACIT, Cen, Cir-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrosteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2304/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…894.02 lakhs and exempt income yielding investment of Rs.13,650.89 lakhs; respectively. Various judicial precedents, i.e. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340 (Bom)], CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [366 ITR 505 (Bom)] and CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. [363 ITR 474 (Guj.)] hold that impugned proportionate interest expenses disallowance does not apply in the case of non-interest bearing funds turning out to be more than exempt investments. We decline Revenue's instant second argument as well. 7.The Revenue's third argument qua the instant issue is that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in holding that onl…

ACIT, Cen.Cir.-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Electrsteel Castings Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both, the appeal of the revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2303/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner M/S. Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Vs. Of Income-Tax, Central (Pan: Aaace4975B) Circle-4(4), Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 In Ita Nos.2303 & 2304/Kol/2019 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Electrosteel Casting Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Ltd. Income-Tax, Central Circle- 4(4), Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Present For: Department By - Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Assessee By - Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Date Of Hearing : 17.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.05.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Appeals By The Revenue & The Cross Objection By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-22 Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 46/Cit(A)-22/2014-15/17-18/Kol & 133/Cit(A)-22/2015-16/18-19/Kol Dated 31.07.2019 For A.Ys. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Against The Separate Assessment Orders Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By Dcit, Central Circle – 4(4), Kolkata, Dated 29.01.2018 & Acit, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata Dated 29.12.2018 Respectively. C.O. Nos. 24 & 25/Kol/2020 Electrosteel Casting Ltd. Ays 2014-15 & 2015-16 2. Shri Deba Kumar Sonowal & Tushar Dhawal Singh, Cit Appeared For The Revenue & Sri S. K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca Appeared For The Assessee.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…894.02 lakhs and exempt income yielding investment of Rs.13,650.89 lakhs; respectively. Various judicial precedents, i.e. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. [313 ITR 340 (Bom)], CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [366 ITR 505 (Bom)] and CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. [363 ITR 474 (Guj.)] hold that impugned proportionate interest expenses disallowance does not apply in the case of non-interest bearing funds turning out to be more than exempt investments. We decline Revenue's instant second argument as well. 7.The Revenue's third argument qua the instant issue is that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in holding that onl…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 926/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…. A.R. relied upon various decisions: ITA Nos.926 & 1118/Ahd/2012 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Page 9 of 13 - CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd – (2019) 102 taxmann.com 52 (SC) - CIT vs. Torrent Power Limited – 363 ITR 474 (Guj) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Limited – 354 ITR 630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials a…

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1118/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…. A.R. relied upon various decisions: ITA Nos.926 & 1118/Ahd/2012 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Page 9 of 13 - CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd – (2019) 102 taxmann.com 52 (SC) - CIT vs. Torrent Power Limited – 363 ITR 474 (Guj) - CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Limited – 354 ITR 630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials a…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. M/S. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2428/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…e decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom.), Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd., 388 ITR 81 (P&H). 14. In the light of the above settled position, we are of the considered opinion that no disallowance of interest u/s 14A is warranted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal no.2 filed by the assessee stands allowed. We make it very clear that the…

Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2400/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…e decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom.), Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd., 388 ITR 81 (P&H). 14. In the light of the above settled position, we are of the considered opinion that no disallowance of interest u/s 14A is warranted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal no.2 filed by the assessee stands allowed. We make it very clear that the…

Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2641/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…e decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC), Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom.), Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) and Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd., 388 ITR 81 (P&H). 14. In the light of the above settled position, we are of the considered opinion that no disallowance of interest u/s 14A is warranted. Accordingly, this ground of appeal no.2 filed by the assessee stands allowed. We make it very clear that the…

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gandhinagar

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 273/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 272-273/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2014-2015 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T, M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gnr Circle. Vs. Plot No.E-18, Jamnagar Gidc Electronics Estate, Sector-26, Gandhinagar.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT. D.R with Smt. Neeju Gupta, Sr.D.R
Section 14A

…Rs. 52,602.09 Lacs and 65,610.45/- lacs respectively. There is no ambiguity, that the own fund of the assessee exceeds the investments. In this regard we refer the judgment of The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having share holding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspec…

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gandhinagar

In the result appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 272/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 272-273/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2014-2015 & 2015-16 D.C.I.T, M/S. Gujarat State Petronet Ltd., Gnr Circle. Vs. Plot No.E-18, Jamnagar Gidc Electronics Estate, Sector-26, Gandhinagar.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIT. D.R with Smt. Neeju Gupta, Sr.D.R
Section 14A

…Rs. 52,602.09 Lacs and 65,610.45/- lacs respectively. There is no ambiguity, that the own fund of the assessee exceeds the investments. In this regard we refer the judgment of The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having share holding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspec…

M/S. Ashok Travels, Prop. of Shri Ashok J.Patel, Baroda vs. The ITO Ward-5(2), Baroda

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 1736/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1736/Ahd/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2010-2011 M/S Ashok Travels, I.T.O, Prop. Of Ashok J. Patel, Vs. Ward-5(2), Behind Jubeli Baug, Baroda. Raopura Road, Vadodara-390001. Pan: Aempp9161P

For Appellant: Smt. Kinjal Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, Sr.D.R

…out of interest free loans and advances. Therefore, no disallowance of interest qua to such loan advances is warranted. In holding so we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having shareholding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspect…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e drawn that investment has been made by the assessee out of its own funds without using the borrowed fund. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having shareholding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspect…

Nirma Chemical Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1190/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e drawn that investment has been made by the assessee out of its own funds without using the borrowed fund. In holding so, we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble jurisdictional High court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having shareholding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of`Rs.195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspect…