HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT

ACIT - 2(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Limited, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Acit-2(2)(2), Room No. 545, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. Appellant Yes Bank Ltd., 15Th Floor, Yes Bank Tower, Ifc 2, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone (West), Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aaacy 2068 D Appellant Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

…ly approved the proposition that the position is to be seen on the balance sheet date. Besides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank's case (supra) has also cited with approval the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (383 ITR 529) (see para 19 of the decision on running pg. no.11 of LPB). The said HDFC bank's case also, in turn, relies on and has followed the earlier decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Reliance Utility & Power Limited's case (supra). In view of the above, it is abundantly clear that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in South India Bank's case has implied…

Tata Motors Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.631/मुं/2013 (िन.व. 2008-09) Tata Motors Limited Bombay House, 24,Homi Mody Street, Hutama Chowk, Mumbai – 400001. Pan: Aaact-2727-Q ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax Circle -2(3), Mumbai. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri J.D.Mistry, Sr.Advocate With Shri Nikhil Tiwari,Advocate "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Ms. Vatsala Jha, Cit-Dr & Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 10/11/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 05/02/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm:

…and borrowed interest bearing funds and if, own interest free funds of the assessee are sufficient to cover the investment made, it shall be presumed that the investments are made by the assessee from available interest free funds.[Re.HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 383 ITR 529(Bom)]. The assessee has substantiated availability of own interest free funds in the form of Share Capital and Reserves & Surplus from the Balance Sheet as on 31/03/2008 (at page 32 of Paper Book) and Funds Flow Statement ( page 318 of the Paper Book). In view of the above, disallowance u/r.8D(2)(ii) is directed to be deleted. In respect of disa…

DCIT-1(1)(2), Mumbai vs. M/S Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mumbai

…at since investment of assessee is less than own funds therefore, presumption arises that investment are sourced from own funds thereby rejecting the application of rule 8D; and also by applying the ratio of decision given in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (2016) 67 Taxmann.com 42 (Bom.) and (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) which has the impact of making the statutory rule redundant and entering into the legislative realm of redrafting the mandatory rule made by the Parliament. 4 ITA Nos. 3195-3196, 3911-3913 & 4579/Mum/2019 & ITA Nos. 266 & 806/Mum/2020 AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 3. On the facts and in the circumstance…

Hindustan Petroleum Corp Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: us. 2.

…at since investment of assessee is less than own funds therefore, presumption arises that investment are sourced from own funds thereby rejecting the application of rule 8D; and also by applying the ratio of decision given in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (2016) 67 Taxmann.com 42 (Bom.) and (2014) 366 ITR 505 (Bom.) which has the impact of making the statutory rule redundant and entering into the legislative realm of redrafting the mandatory rule made by the Parliament. ITA Nos. 3195-3196, 3911-3913 & 4579/Mum/2019 & ITA Nos. 266 & 806/Mum/2020 AYs 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17 3. On the facts and in the circumstan…

Indiabullas Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai

…d in terms the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank : [2021] 130 taxmann.com 178 (SC) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3), Mumbai : [2016] 383 ITR 529 (Bombay). Accordingly, we decline to interfere with the conclusion drawn by the CIT(A) and the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition of INR 227,47,04,516/- made by the Assessing Officer in respect of disallowance of interest cost by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the Act read with Rules 8D(2)(i). In terms of the aforesaid, Ground No. i. &…

Larsen & Toubro Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "K" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Larsen & Toubro Limited Taxation Department, L&T House, N. M. Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400001 [PAN: AAACL0140P] …………… Appellant Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 2(2), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Respondent ……………. Mumbai - 400020 Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri J. D. Mistry, Sr. Advocate Shri Madhur Agrawal Shri Fenil Bhatt For the Respondent/Department : Dr. Yogesh Kamat Shri A.K. Ambastha Date Conclusion of hearing : 15.09.2023 Pronouncemen…

M/S. Neelkanth Mansion and Infrastrucutre Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Neelkanth Mansions & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd 5Th Floor, Fine House, Anandji Lane, M.G. Road, Ghatkopar (E) Mumbai- 400 077 Pan: Aaacn1245R ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit, Circle 14(1) (1) 4Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

…h far away from interest free funds available with the assessee. On this issue we respectfully relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) and HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. CIT 67 Taxmann.com 42 (Bom.). Now as far income received as share of profit from partnership firm, which is exempt u/s. 10(2A) of the Act is concerned, revenue is relied upon the 7 M/s. Neelkanth Mansion & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. decision of coordinate bench in the case of Vishnu Anant Mahajan vs. ACIT, ITA No. 3002/Ahd. /2009, which in our opinion is misplaced…

Tata Chemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl Ciat 2(3), Mumbai

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

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

…ailable to assessee ITA.NO. 120/MUM/2013 (A.Y: 2008-09) Tata Chemicals Ltd were sufficient to meet its investment it will be presumed that investments were made from such interest free funds. 19. In HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, (2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom) / 2016 SCC Online Bom 1109, the assessee was a Scheduled Bank and the issue therein also pertained to disallowance under Section 14A. In this case, the Bombay High Court even while remanding the case back to Tribunal for adjudicating afresh observed (relying on its own previous judgment in same assessee's case for a different Assessment Yea…

Cyqyator Media Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-6(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singh आअसं.2370 /मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2015-16) Cyquator Media Services Private Limited, 18Th Floor, A Wing Marathon Futurex, N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. Pan: Aaecp-0069-P ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle – 6(2)(1), Mumbai Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 021 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : Shri Jay Bhansali "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta सुनवाई क" ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2023 घोषणा क" ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/10/2023 आदेश/Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[ In Short ‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 21/06/2023, For The Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. The Assessee In Appeal Has Raised As Many As Eight Grounds. All The Grounds Of Appeal Are In Respect Of A Single Issue I.E. Disallowance U/S. 14A Of 2 The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short ‘The Act’] R.W. Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 [In Short ‘The Rules’].

…gh the assessee had made suo-motu disallowance on account of interest expenditure, the said disallowance was made by the assessee wrongly and was not in conformity with the decisions of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., 313 ITR 340. The assessee filed revised computation with revised working of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act before the Assessing Officer, however, the same was rejected by the Assessing Officer. The assessee raised the issue before the CIT(A) by way of additional ground of appeal. The CIT(A) dismissed the add…

Aegis Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

…unds and not with borrowed funds. Few of such decisions are as under:-  Reliance Industries Ltd [ 2019] 410 ITR 466 (SC)  South Indian Bank Ltd (438 ITR 1) (SC) (2021)  CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (313 ITR 340) (Bom HC)  HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT (383 ITR 529) (Bom HC)  Ashok Commercial Enterprises (ITA (L) No 2985 of 2009) (Bom HC) 23. Moreover, this Tribunal in A.Y.2009-10 had deleted the similar disallowance which reads as under:- “57 In such a situation, where the assessee has substantial own funds, then presumption is that assessee has given advance to its sister concern from its own funds. Thus…

ACIT C.C. -13, Cent. RG.-3, Mumbai vs. M/S. Krishiraj Trading Ltd (Now Mergeed With Mgn Agro Properties Pvt. Ltyd, Mumbai

…estricted to disallowance under 15. Section Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules read with Section 14A of the Act to INR.5,71,365/- by placing reliance upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Limited Vs. DCIT – 2(3), Mumbai: [2016] 383 ITR 529. While the CIT(A) has restricted to disallowance under Section Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules read with Section 14A of the Act to INR 17,60,300/- being total administrative expense claimed in the Profit and Loss Account. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the CIT(A). Ground No. 1 raised by the revenue is dismissed. In…

Viraj Profiles Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT-CC-3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs. 776 & 775/MUM/2021 (A.Y. 2011-12 & 2013-14) M/s. Viraj Profiles Limited v. DCIT, Central Circle 3(2) 1st Floor, Viraj Towers Room No. 402, 4th Floor JN of Andheri Kurla Road Aayakar Bhavan W.E. Highway, Andheri (E) Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai- 400069 PAN: AABCV1740N (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NO.2098 & 2097/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2011-12 & 2013-14) DCIT, Central Range – 3(2) v. M/s. Viraj Profiles Limited Central Range - 3 1st Floor, Viraj Tower Room…

DCIT-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Idbi Bank Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit- 3(4) V. M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd 29Th Floor, Center-1 Central Processing Unit (Tds) World Trade Center, Cuffe Parade Plot No. 82/83, Elemach Bldg Mumbai- 400005 Road No. 7, Street No. 15 Midc, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Idbi Bank Ltd V. Acit/Dcit-Ltu 22Nd Floor, Idbi Tower 29Th Floor, Centre No. 1 Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade World Trade Centre, Cuffe Parade Mumbai- 400005 Mumbai- 400005 Pan: Aabci8842G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…securities from which tax free income was earned of ₹ 1598.60 Page No. | 10 ITA NO. 2937 & 2919/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2017-18) M/s. IDBI Bank Ltd 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, s…