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 367,154 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, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1209/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

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…

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

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1208/AHD/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

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 Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1057/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

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 Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1056/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

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…

M/S.Sheetal Real vs. Income Tax Officer

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

ITA/83/2010HC Orissa08 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 372A

…ecurities, has come out of interest free funds available with Assessee. In such situation Section 14A of the Act would not be applicable. Similar views have been expressed by other High Courts in CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd. MANU/GJ/0279/2013 : (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj), CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. MANU/KA/0526/2016 : (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Karn) and CIT v. Max India Ltd. MANU/PH/1743/2016 : (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P & H) Mr. S Ganesh the learned Senior Counsel while citing these cases from the High Courts have further pointed out that those judgments have attained finality. On reading of these judgments, we are…

M/S Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 973/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chetan R., Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…lowing decisions where it has been held that if the investment is made out of own funds, disallowance under section 14A cannot be made: (a) CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. reported in 319 ITR 204 (Punj. &Har.) (b) CIT v. Suzlon Energy Ltd. reported in 354 ITR 630 (Guj) (c) DIT(IT) v.BNP Paribas SA reported in 214 Taxman 548 (Born); (d) Yatish Trading Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT reported in 129 ITD 237 (Mum.) (e) CIT v. K. Raheja Corpn. (P.) Ltd. [IT Appeal No. 1260 of 2009, dated 8-8-2011] (f) MarutiUdyog Ltd. v. Dy. CIT reported in 92 ITD 119 (Delhi.) (g) ParanjapeAutocast (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [ITA Nos.…

M/S Godrej Investment Pvt. Ltd. (Now Amalgamated With Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(1)(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, ground raised by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3163/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Godrej Investments Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit – Circle – 14(1)(2) M/S. Kalyaniwall & Mistry Llp Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Esplande House, 2Nd Floor Mumbai - 400020 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg Fort, Mumbai – 400001 Pan: Aaacg1395D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Farrokh Irani Department By : Shri Ambuselvam

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh IraniFor Respondent: Shri Ambuselvam
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…n the case of HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 366 (TR 505 (Bom.)  Decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. UTI Bank Ltd. (Tax Appeal No. 118 of 2073)  Decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Suzlon Energy e Ltd. vs. OCIT reported in 354 ITR 630 (Guj.)  Decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, in the case of Bayer Bio Science (P) Ltd. reported in 148 TTJ 73. Decision of the income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, in the case  of Bunge Agribusiness India (P) Ltd. reported in 142 TTJ 817. Decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, in the case  of Pranik Shipping…

Dy CIT CC 7 (2), Mumbai vs. M/S Man Global Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and cross objections of the assessee in CO Nos

ITA 7440/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Sri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7440/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7533/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7534/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2013-14) आयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7535/Mum/2019 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2014-15) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ Ita No. 7536/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2015-16)

…अिधकरण “B” "यायपीठ "यायपीठ "यायपीठ मुंबई "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। म"। म"। म"। आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी राजेश कुमार लेखा सद" एवं "ी अमरजीत िसंह, "ाियक सद" सम" । BEFORE SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ ITA No. 7440/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2011-12) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ ITA No. 7533/Mum/2019 अपील (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year 2012-13) आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ ITA No. 7534/Mum/2019 अपी…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5/RPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5/Rpr/2020) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, A.R
Section 145(3)Section 14A

…e funds available at the disposal of the assessee. A reference in this regard has been made on behalf of the assessee to the several judicial precedents including CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 89 CCH 0185 (Bombay High Court); CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj.). 12.2 Thus, having regard to absence of any exempt income as well as availability of sufficient net worth of interest free nature, we do not see any reason to differ with the view taken by the CIT(A). Thus, no interference with the order of the CIT(A) is called for. Consequently, ground nos. 4 & 5 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 13. In…

D.C.I.T. Central Cricle, Raipur vs. Mahamaya Steel Industries Ltd, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 62/RPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur21 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri N. K. Choudhryआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 62/Rpr/2018) ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, A.R
Section 14A

…e funds available at the disposal of the assessee. A reference in this regard has been made on behalf of the assessee to the several judicial precedents including CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 89 CCH 0185 (Bombay High Court); CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj.). 13.2 Thus, having regard to absence of any exempt income as well as availability of sufficient net worth of interest free nature, we do not see any reason to differ with the view taken by the CIT(A). Thus, no interference with the order of the CIT(A) is called for. Consequently, ground no.3 of Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 14. In the r…

The South Indian Bank Ltd vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

C.A. No.-009606-009606 - 2011Supreme Court09 Sept 2021

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

Section 14Section 14A

…be made. 21. On behalf of Revenue Mr. Arijit Prasad, the learned Senior Advocate refers to SA Builders v. CIT8 where this Court ruled on issue of disallowance in relation to funds lent to sister concern out of mixed funds. The issue in SA 5 (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj)/ 2013 SCC Online Guj 8613 6 (2016) 383 ITR 490 (Karn)/ 2016 SCC Online Kar 8490 7 (2016) 388 ITR 81 (P & H) / 2016 SCC Online P&H 6788 8 [(2007) 1 SCC 781] Page 12 of 22 Builders is pending consideration before the larger bench of this Court in SLP (C) No. 14729 of 2012 titled as Addl. CIT v. Tulip Star Hotels Ltd. The counsel theref…

Shri Kamlesh J. Jhaveri, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 10(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1254/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1254/Ahd/2016 नि◌धा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 Shri Kamlesh J. Jhaveri, Income Tax Officer, B/201, Siddh Silla Apartment, Vs. Ward-10(1), B/H. Ekta Tower, Ahmedabad. Barage Road, Vasna, Ahmedabad-380007. Pan: Aetpj5973L

For Appellant: Shri Asseem Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr.D.R
Section 145(3)

…the interest free advances has been made by the assessee out of its own without involving any 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 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…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Paramount Communication Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 2288/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…ment of Rs.24,82,23,001/- (Rs.24.82 Cr) was made on 3.8.2007 in the equity shares of Paramount Holding Ltd, Cyprus, a subsidiary company. Dividend from foreign subsidiary is taxable, therefore, section 14A has no applicability-CIT v Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) 25.3. Referring to page 35 of the paper book, he submitted that the remaining investment of Rs.2,57,48,000/- (Rs.2.57 Cr) was made in earlier years as under:- ITANo.1378 & 2288/Del/2017 i. Investment of Rs.1,68,000/- in the shares of “Haryana Financial Corporation” was made in the assessment year 1996-97 and ii. Investment of Rs.2,55,80…

Paramount Communications Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 1378/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…ment of Rs.24,82,23,001/- (Rs.24.82 Cr) was made on 3.8.2007 in the equity shares of Paramount Holding Ltd, Cyprus, a subsidiary company. Dividend from foreign subsidiary is taxable, therefore, section 14A has no applicability-CIT v Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) 25.3. Referring to page 35 of the paper book, he submitted that the remaining investment of Rs.2,57,48,000/- (Rs.2.57 Cr) was made in earlier years as under:- ITANo.1378 & 2288/Del/2017 i. Investment of Rs.1,68,000/- in the shares of “Haryana Financial Corporation” was made in the assessment year 1996-97 and ii. Investment of Rs.2,55,80…

M/S. Paramount Communictions Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No.767/Del/2014 is partly allowed,

ITA 767/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[Assessment Year: 2009-10]

Section 43A

…ment of Rs.24,82,23,001/- (Rs.24.82 Cr) was made on 3.8.2007 in the equity shares of Paramount Holding Ltd, Cyprus, a subsidiary company. Dividend from foreign subsidiary is taxable, therefore, section 14A has no applicability-CIT v Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj.) 25.3. Referring to page 35 of the paper book, he submitted that the remaining investment of Rs.2,57,48,000/- (Rs.2.57 Cr) was made in earlier years as under:- ITANo.1378 & 2288/Del/2017 i. Investment of Rs.1,68,000/- in the shares of “Haryana Financial Corporation” was made in the assessment year 1996-97 and ii. Investment of Rs.2,55,80…

ACIT, Central Circle, Bikaner vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, Sriganganagar

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 45/JODH/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Feb 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, 4-A-15, Central Circle, Jawahar Nagar, Bikaner. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aiepg 8893 R

Section 40

…his case:  CIT Vs Reliance Industries (2019) 3 CTR 149 (SC) 5 ITA 45/Jodh/2019 ACIT Vs Smt. Alpana Gupta.  CIT Vs HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 0505 (Bom)(HC)  CIT Vs UTI Bank Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 8 (Guj) (HC) (Magz.)  CIT Vs Suzlon Energy Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Guj)(HC)  CIT Vs Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom(HC). 6.2 Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, the disallowance of Rs. 1,71,693/- made by the A.O. is deleted. The appellant gets relief in Ground No. 3.” From perusal of the record, we noticed that the assessee was having opening capital of Rs.2,07…

M/S. Madhu Silica Pvt. Ltd., Bhavnagar vs. The ACIT., Circle-1, Bhavnagar

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

ITA 37/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 37/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2013-2014 M/S Madhu Silica Pvt. Ltd., A.C.I.T., Plot No.147, Gidc, Vs. Circle-1, Vartej, Bhavnagar. Bhavnagar-364060

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr.D.R
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 35

…et the investment then no any disallowances on account of interest is warranted under section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act. In this respect we draw support 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 DCIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA Appeals 1766/Ahd/12, 2342/Ahd/15, 2343/Ahd/2015,

ITA 1766/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…017 Page No 20 Dy. CIT vs. AIA Engineering Ltd. & AIA Engineering Ltd. vs. DCIT fund for making investment. The ld. counsel has also placed reliance on the following decisions:- > CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. - 363 ITR 474 (Guj.) > CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. - 354 ITR 630 (Guj) > CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. - 352 ITR 583 (Guj) > CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I). Ltd. - (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) > CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. - 313 ITR 340 (Bom) > Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT - 298 ITR 298 (SC) The ld. counsel also submitted that assessee was having substantial interest free…

Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA Appeals 1766/Ahd/12, 2342/Ahd/15, 2343/Ahd/2015,

ITA 1757/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…017 Page No 20 Dy. CIT vs. AIA Engineering Ltd. & AIA Engineering Ltd. vs. DCIT fund for making investment. The ld. counsel has also placed reliance on the following decisions:- > CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. - 363 ITR 474 (Guj.) > CIT vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd. - 354 ITR 630 (Guj) > CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. - 352 ITR 583 (Guj) > CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I). Ltd. - (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) > CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. - 313 ITR 340 (Bom) > Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT - 298 ITR 298 (SC) The ld. counsel also submitted that assessee was having substantial interest free…

Bhavin Upadhyay, Vadodara vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1459/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1459/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-2015 Bhavin Upadhyay, D.C.I.T., Neuro Care Clinic, Vs. Circle-3(1), Kharivav Road, Vadodara. Dandia Bazar, Vadodara-390001. Pan: Aaepu2434L

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rajdeep Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 14A

…mption that the investment has been made by the assessee out of its own without involving any 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 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…