HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT

Mirah Hospitality & Food Solutons P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 14, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Ravish Sood

…of interest free funds no disallowance is required to be made u/s 14A of the Act. In support of his contention Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to judgment of the Hon‟ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT [2016] 383 ITR 529 (Bom) which is relevant for the proposition that when the assessee is having interest-free funds or own funds more than the interest bearing funds, then the presumption is that the investment in tax free securities has been made from interest free funds and therefore, no disallowance is permissible u/s 14A of the Act. Ld Counsel for the assessee…

S. Mansukhlal & Co., Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(2), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4793/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/S. S. Mansukhlal & Co., The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ Srbc & Associates Llp, Of Income Tax –14(2), V. Chartered Accountants, Earnest House, Iii Floor, 12 Th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai – 400 021. Dadar (West), Mumbai – 400 028. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahfs9459A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4793/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11) M/s. S. Mansukhlal & Co., The Deputy Commissioner बनाम/ SRBC & Associates LLP, of Income Tax –14(2), v. Chartered Accountants, Earnest House, III floor, 12 th Floor, The Ruby, Nariman Point, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai – 400 021. Dadar (West), Mumbai – 400 028. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAHFS9459A .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri…

Rallis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal as may be treated as partly allowed

…law and facts. It was further submitted that Hon’ble ITAT in assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2007-08 deleted the disallowance for similar reasons. The reliance was also placed upon the recent judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank v. DCIT 383 ITR 529. 4.1. Per contra, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. 4.2. We have gone through the orders passed by the lower authorities as well as order of the Tribunal for A.Y. 2007-08. It is noted from the perusal of assessee’s Balance Sheet dt 31st March 2002 that own funds of the assessee were aggregating to Rs. 307.53 crores where in…

DCIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Aptech Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

Aptech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

Aptech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

Aptech Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

DCIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Apatech Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

ACIT 8(1), Mumbai vs. Apatech Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am) आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.946 & 723/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2007-08 & 2008-09)

…ufficient to cover the investment in the shares in subsidiary companies by strongly relying on the decision in the case of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of SBI DHFL Ltd reported in 376 ITR 296 (Bom) and in the case of CIT V/s HDFC Bank Ltd reported in 383 ITR 529 (Bom). Considering the facts of the case and in the light of the various decisions cited above, we find that the assessee has made investment in the subsidiary companies during the year which is a finding of fact recorded by the authorities below. It is also clear from the copy of audited balance sheet as on 31.3.2007 that the assessee’s own fund…

Grindewell Norton Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: (A.Y : 2009-10)

…s. It is pointed out that the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utility (supra) has been also applied in the context of Sec. 14A of the Act by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC bank Limited v. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom). On this basis, it is contended that the disallowance of interest for the purpose of Sec. 14A of the Act is not justified in the instant case. 14 M/s. Grindwell Norton Ltd. 14. On the other hand, the ld. DR reiterated the stand of Revenue that the applicability of Rule 8D of the Rules in order to compute the disallowance u/s 14A of the Ac…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai vs. Sharekhan Financial Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…id not establish the nexus between the interest free funds and investment made by it. On the contrary, AR submitted that above said contention of the assessee have been duly considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd (366 ITR 505 and 383 ITR 529). 5. We have also gone through the copy of balance-sheet filed by the assessee. Perusal of the same would show that the interest-free fund available with the assessee is in excess of the amount of investment made by it during the year under consideration and also in the immediately preceding year. We notice that learned CIT(A) has duly taken not…

Windia Infrastructure Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

…4A of the Act. For this purpose reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements :- i)CIT vs. India Advantage Securities, ITA No.1131/2013, dated 17.3.2015 (Bombay High Court); ii)CCI Ltd. Vs. Jt.CIT, 250 CTR 291 (Kar) iii)HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom) In support of the proposition that no disallowance u/s.14A is warranted in respect of investment in the subsidiary/group companies, reliance was placed on the following decisions :- i)Cheminvest Ltd. v CIT [378 ITR 33 (Del)/ 281 CTR 447 (Del)] ii) Garware Wall Ropes Limited v Addl. CIT (ITA No. 5408/Mum/2012) iii)M/s JM Financial Limited v…

Lakshmiwadi Mines & Minerals P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 21, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3587/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Lakshmiwadi Mines & Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ Minerals Private Ltd., Tax – 2, V. Yusuf Building, 3 Rd Floor, R. No. 344, Room No. 20, Aayakar Bhavan, 43-45, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 001. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacl 1756 F .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

…s for making investments in securities capable of yielding exempt income. Reliance was placed on the decision of 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) and submitted that in the absence of any cogent material brought on record by the Revenue that interest bearing funds were diverted in making the investment in securities capable of yielding exempt income, the presumption shall apply that the assessee has invested own funds in making investment in securities capable of yielding exempt in…

Ansh Merchandise P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.411/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-08) Ansh Merchandise Private Dcit – 5(2), बनाम/ Limited, 11, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, V. 84, Appollo House, Mumbai – 400 020. Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabcn8176E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.411/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-08) Ansh Merchandise Private DCIT – 5(2), बनाम/ Limited, 11, 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, v. 84, Appollo House, Mumbai – 400 020. Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AABCN8176E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 398/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Ansh Merchandise Private बनाम/ Add…

Ansh Merchandise P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(2), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.411/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-08) Ansh Merchandise Private Dcit – 5(2), बनाम/ Limited, 11, 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, V. 84, Appollo House, Mumbai – 400 020. Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aabcn8176E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.411/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-08) Ansh Merchandise Private DCIT – 5(2), बनाम/ Limited, 11, 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, v. 84, Appollo House, Mumbai – 400 020. Bombay Samachar Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AABCN8176E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 398/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Ansh Merchandise Private बनाम/ Add…

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

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

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)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “A” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर 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) Assessee by Shri Divyesh J.Shah / Moksha K.Shah Revenue by : Shri A. Ramachandran सुनवाई क…

Haldyan Corporation Ltd Formlery Known As Haldyn Glass Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(2)1, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

…owance, that would have been possible as per law and facts of this case was under rule 8D(2)(i) and no disallowance was liable to be made in clauses (ii) & (iii) in view of the latest judgement of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd vs DCIT 383 ITR 529. On the other hand, perusal of section 14A reveals that disallowance therein can be made with respect to expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of total income under this Act. Thus, comparison of clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB with section 14A, reveals that though both may appear to be id…

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

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

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)

…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 subject to limited verification by the AO about the correctness…

Hdfc Bank Td, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

…000 In the light of the above factual position, the issue on merits stands squarely covered by the assessee's own case, viz: • DCIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. (ITA o. 45291M12005) (Mum Tribunal) • CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) (Born HC) • HDFC Bank Ltd. V. DCIT (383 ITR 529) (Born HC) 7. In support of the contention as to whether disallowance offered by the assessee in the return of income can be deleted/reduced by the ITAT, ld. AR relied on the decision of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of TATA Industries Ltd. V. ITA (ITA No. 4894/Mum/2008]. 8. We had carefully gone through the order of tribunal in the case of TATA In…

Hdfc Bank Td, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

…000 In the light of the above factual position, the issue on merits stands squarely covered by the assessee's own case, viz: • DCIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. (ITA o. 45291M12005) (Mum Tribunal) • CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) (Born HC) • HDFC Bank Ltd. V. DCIT (383 ITR 529) (Born HC) 7. In support of the contention as to whether disallowance offered by the assessee in the return of income can be deleted/reduced by the ITAT, ld. AR relied on the decision of the Mumbai ITAT in the case of TATA Industries Ltd. V. ITA (ITA No. 4894/Mum/2008]. 8. We had carefully gone through the order of tribunal in the case of TATA In…