How many judgments cite HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT?

408 judgments on BharatTax cite HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT (383 ITR 529), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 40(a)(ia), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 8D, Section 10(34).

HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT

383 ITR 529High Court2016#178 most cited

What is HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Where an assessee has sufficient interest-free funds, investments yielding exempt income are presumed to be made out of such funds, precluding disallowance of related interest expenditure under section 14A.

408

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 368,153 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT · section 14A · disallowance of interest expenditure · exempt income · interest free funds · Rule 8D · own funds · corporate guarantee · investment

Also reported as

67 Taxmann.com 42

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 143(3)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 8D Section 10(34)Section 115JB Section 115JB(2)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 115jb(2)corporate guarantee disallowance of interest expenditure disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a most appropriate method interest under section 234b advance tax book profits arm's length price section 115j associated enterprises

Judgments citing HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT Circle 3, Lucknow vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 141/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Before Shri Kul Bharat & Before Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyshri Nikhil Choudharyshri Nikhil Choudharyita Nos. 112 To 114/Lkw/2024 A.Ys. 2015-16 To 2017-18 Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Vs. Dcit Bank Ltd P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. 226001. Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 226006 Pan:Aaaar1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) A.Y.2016-17 Acit Circle-3 Vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh Ltd Kar Bhawan, Lucknow Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, 555Ga/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 226006 Pan: Aaaar1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.A. Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Addl. Cit- Dr Date Of Hearing: 28.04.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: Date Of Pronouncement: 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Bench.: These Four Appeals Have Been Have Been Filed For The Assessment Years 2015 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016- 17 & 2017-18 By The Assessee & Revenue Ssessee & Revenue Against The Respective Orders Of The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024 Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024. While The Delhi Dated 02.02.2024, 05.02.2024 & 05.02.2024 Assessee Is In Appeal In Assessment Years 2015 Assessee Is In Appeal In Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18, The Revenue 18, The Revenue

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl

Section 36(1)(v)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 112 to 114/LKW/2024 A.Ys. 2015-16 to 2017-18 Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari vs. DCIT Bank Ltd P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. 22600…

Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow vs. Dy.CIT, Lucknow

ITA 114/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.112 to 114/LKW/2024 A.Ys.2015-16 to 2017-18 Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd vs. DCIT 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. PAN:AAAAR1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.141/LKW/2024 A.Y.2016-17 ACIT Circle-3 vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 PAN: AAAAR1269D (Appellant) (Respondent) Asses…

Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow vs. Dy. CIT, Lucknow

ITA 113/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. K.R. Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. CIT-

Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.112 to 114/LKW/2024 A.Ys.2015-16 to 2017-18 vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 PAN:AAAAR1269D (Appellant) DCIT P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. (Respondent) ITA No.141/LKW/2024 Α.Υ.2016-17 vs. ACIT Circle-3 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001 PAN: AAAAR1269D (Appellant) Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 (Responden…

Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd, Lucknow vs. Dy.CIT, Lucknow

ITA 112/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of hearing

Section 36(1)(v)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.112 to 114/LKW/2024 A.Ys.2015-16 to 2017-18 vs. DCIT Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd 555GA/86, Sardari Khera, Alambagh, Lucknow-226006 PAN:AAAAR1269D (Appellant) P.K. Complex, Raja Ram Mohan Rai Marg, Lucknow-226001. (Respondent) ITA No.141/LKW/2024 Α.Υ.2016-17 ACIT Circle-3 57 Ram Tirath Marg Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001 PAN: AAAAR1269D (Appellant) Assessee by: Revenue by: Date of hearing: Date of pronouncement: vs. Rajdhani Nagar Sahkari Bank Ltd 555…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Nagpur vs. M/S. Fuelco Coal India Ltd., Nagpur

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 90/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40aSection 68

…/s. Fuel Co. Coal India Ltd. ITA no.90/Nag./2022 B) CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by following the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. reported at 313 ITR 340 (Bom) and HDFC Bank Ltd. reported at 383 ITR 529 (Bom) and Apex Court judgement in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. as assessee was having share and reserves & surplus at Rs.24.94 crores. C) Issue in dispute is covered in favour of assessee by decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. reported at 410 ITR 466 (SC).” 7. After carefully perusing the records and an…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JM I.T.A. No.3579/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sapphire Foods India Vs DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Limited . Mumbai. 7th Floor, A Wing, Prism Tower, Link Road, Mind Space, Goregaon, West Maharashtra. PAN:[AANCS5595A] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant by Ms. Aarti Sathe, & Ms. Assavari Kadam, AR Respondent by Ms. Pradhanya Golap, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 03.12.2024 Date of 13.01.2025 Pronouncement ORDER Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: Present appeal is filed by the assessee is against order dated 29/06/2024 passed by NFAC, De…

Assistant Commissioner, Mumbai vs. Idbi Bank Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue bearing ITA No

ITA 5250/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Chellamani NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar CIT (DR)

Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250Section 36

…essee’s cases as the interest free funds of ₹14567.58 Crore are far exceed the securities from which tax free income was earned of ₹ 1598.60 Crore. In support of his submission the learned AR relied upon the decision of Bombay High Court in case of HDFC Bank (383 ITR 529) and Gujarat High Court in Syntax Industries Ltd (82 taxmann.com 171). It was submitted that the SLP filed against the order of Gujarat High Court has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. 13. On the other head the learned DR for the revenue after going through digital furnished in the chart and decision relied by learned AR of the assessee,…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circel-1(2, Nagpur vs. M/S. Vibrant Global Capital Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 229/NAG/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…- u/s 14A of I.T. Act 1961. A.O. – Para 5.2 to 5.2.7 – Page 6 to 9 CIT(A) - Para 4.2 to 4.2.1 - Page 63 to 68 A) CIT(A) has deleted the addition by following the decision of Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT reported at 383 ITR 529 (Bom). (P- 46 to 61 [Vol. – IV] (50, 57, 58) B) The assessee company is having share capital, reserve & surplus and interest free funds at Rs.62.55 crore. The investment in shares and securities is Rs.32.98 crore [P-67 of impugned order of CIT(A)]. Investment in shares can be reasonably explained with reference to available funds. No disallowance…

Muthoot Bankers, Trivandrum vs. The ACIT Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

ITA 610/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sreenivasan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member ITA Nos. 609 & 610/Coch/2023 (Assessment Years: 2008-09 & 2013-14) Muthoot Bankers ACIT, Circle 1(2) Punnen Road Trivandrum vs. Trivandrum 695034 [PAN: AAEFM0671P] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Sreenivasan, CA Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 19.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024 O R D E R Per Bench These assessee’s twin appeals arise against orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre , Delhi [CIT(A)] in…

Muthoot Bankers, Trivandrum vs. The ACIT Circle 1(2), Trivandrum

ITA 609/COCH/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sreenivasan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 14ASection 250

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

ITA 4105/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…thorized representative heavily relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Versus Syntax Industries (2018) 93 taxmann.com 24, honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus HDFC Bank Ltd (2016) 383 ITR 529, CIT versus HDFC bank (2014) 366 ITR 505, principal Commissioner of income tax versus Sapnco Ltd in ITA number 488/2016 dated 26th number 2018 and principal Commissioner of income tax versus JSW power trading Co Ltd in ITA number 1075/2014. It was the claim of the learned authorized representative that no disallowance is required under rule 8D (2…

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

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

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…zed representative heavily relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax Versus Syntax Industries (2018) 93 taxmann.com 24, honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus HDFC Bank Ltd (2016) 383 ITR 529, CIT versus HDFC bank (2014) 366 ITR 505, principal Commissioner of income tax versus Sapnco Ltd in ITA number 488/2016 dated 26th number 2018 and principal Commissioner of income tax versus JSW power trading Co Ltd in ITA number 1075/2014. It was the claim of the learned authorized representative that no disallowance is required under rule…

Mega Engineers & Builders, Port Blair vs. DCIT, Cir. 3(2), Port Blair

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 312/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 194C

…re extracted below:- “11. Having considered the submissions of the parties, we find that the issue involved in the Revenue's appeal is squarely covered in assessee's favour by the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd (383 ITR 529). In that case also the issue before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court was whether any part of the interest paid by the Bank could be disallowed U/S 14A read with Rule 80(2)(ii). On appeal this Tribunal and thereafter the Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that since the Bank's own funds were substantially more than the cost of investments yielding tax f…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…Bank Ltd: 215 Taxman 8 (Guj.)[SLP dismissed vide order dated 07.02.2014 in Civil Appeal No. 468/2014 - CIT v. Max India Ltd: 388 ITR 81 (P&H) - H.T. Media Limited v. PCIT: 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) - HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 366 ITR 505 (Bom) - HDFC Bank Ltd v. DCIT: 383 ITR 529 (Bom) - CIT v. Abhishek Industries Ltd : 380 ITR 652 (P&H) - Lubi Submersibles Ltd.: ITA No.868 of 2010 (Guj.) - CIT Y. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd. : 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT v. Torrent Power Ltd.: 363 ITR 474 (Guj) In view of above, it is respectfully submitted that no part of interest expenditure can be disallowed under section 14A of the Act…

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

ITA 2232/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth J., Ld. DR

Section 14Section 144CSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 57

…iture ought to be deleted. (i) South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 438 ITR 1 (SC) (09-09-2021) (Para 27 Page 51) (Page 45 to 51) (ii) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (Page 52 to 55) (iii) HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT 383 ITR 529 (Bom. HC) (Page 56 to 68) 8. Alternatively and without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that interest expense of Rs. 1144.02 Lakhs includes interest aggregating to Rs. 1041.99 Lakhs which is in relation to (EPC) Export Packing Credit and Pre Shipment Credit in Foreign Currency incurred for the purpose of export/ import business of the appe…

Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax 1(3)1, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Grindwell Norton Limited, Leela Business Park Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed, in aforesaid terms

ITA 785/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…assessee only in respect of interest expenditure after examining the fact that the assessee had own interest free funds to cover investments. To support the findings of CIT(A) he placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd reported as 383 ITR 529 (Bom) and South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT, 130 taxmann.com 178(SC). 9. The learned AR further submitted that in the cross objections the assessee has raised a ground with respect to disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). Short prayer of the assessee is that disallowance be restricted to only dividend yielding investments. To su…

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Vizag Seaport Pvt. Ltd., Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 383/VIZ/2017[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam12 Apr 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon‟Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon‟Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 383/Viz/2017 (धनधाारणिर्ा/ Assessment Year : 2012-13) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Vizag Seaport Pvt Ltd., Income Tax, Administrative Block, Circle-5(1), S4 Gallery, Port Area, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam – 530035. (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) [Pan :Aabcv2484K] अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Fenil A Bhatt, Ar प्रत्याथी की ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनिाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15/02/2024 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date Of : /04/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Pers. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri Fenil A Bhatt, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…he case of CIT vs. HDFC Bank Limited in 17 Income Tax Appeal No. 330 of 2012 dated 23/07/2014. The Ld. AR also placed reliance on the following case laws: 1. CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (2009) 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) 2. CIT vs. HDFC Bank Limited (2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom.) 3. S.P. Jaiswal Estates (P.) Ltd vs. CIT (2012) 140 ITD 19 (Mumbai ITAT) Further, the Ld. AR also submitted that the capital work-in- progress in page No. 9 of the paper book stood at Rs. 2,36,04,888/- whereas own funds included the cash generated from operations stood at Rs. 83,76,74,466/- and Rs. 38,58,79,722/- respectively. Therefore h…

Agarwal Industries Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 812/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 37Section 37(1)

…ITA 812 Agarwal Industries P Ltd आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Vice-President AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos.812/Hyd/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15) Agarwal Industries (P) Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward –1 (2) PAN:AACCA0094R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) राज" व "ारा/Revenue by: Smt. K. Haritha, CIT(DR) and Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri Sunil Kumar Jain, CA सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 19/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 22…

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 537/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyaltata International Ltd., Block A, Shivsagar Estates Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai- 400018, Pan: Aaact3198F ...... Appellant Vs. Acit – 7(3), R. No. 675, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Marg Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Hiwase, Ld. DR

Section 144CSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ure ought to be deleted. (i) South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 438 ITR 1 (SC) (09- 09-2021) (Para 27 Page 51) (Page 45 to 51) (ii) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (Page 52 to 55) (iii) HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT 383 ITR 529 (Bom. HC) (Page 56 to 68) 8. Alternatively and without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that interest expense of Rs. 1144.02 Lakhs includes interest aggregating to Rs. 1041.99 Lakhs which is in relation to (EPC) Export Packing Credit and Pre Shipment Credit in Foreign Currency incurred for the purpose of export/ import business of the app…