Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

379 ITR 347Supreme Court of India2015#208 most cited

What is Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Revenue cannot substitute its judgment for that of a businessman regarding the necessity or reasonableness of an expenditure. If an expense is incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, it is deductible, and the Revenue cannot question its commercial expediency.

361

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · 379 ITR 347 · 16 SCC 359 · Section 36(1)(iii) · commercial expediency · business expediency · disallowance of expenditure · interest-free advances · corporate guarantee · wholly and exclusively for business · Revenue's armchair approach · sales promotion expenditure

Also reported as

16 SCC 359

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 147Section 1961Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 132Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancescommercial expediencysection 36(1)(iii)corporate guaranteebusiness expediencysection 36book profitssection 36(1)arm's length pricetransfer pricing adjustmentassociated enterprisessection 92c

Judgments citing Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

M/S. Krishna Developers, Jamnagar vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 459/RJT/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.458-459/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 M/S. Krishna Developers, D.C.I.T, 402, 4Th Floor, Oscar Apartment, Vs. Central Circle-2, Limda Lane, Rajkot. Jamnagar.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad, CIT. DR
Section 153C

…Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Dalamia Cement (P) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 (Delhi) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) Once it is established that there is nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the Board of Directors and assume the role to decide how much is reaso…

M/S. Krishna Developers, Jamnagar vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cen. Cir.2, Rajkot-Gujarat

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 458/RJT/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot25 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.458-459/Rjt/2015 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2011-2012 & 2012-2013 M/S. Krishna Developers, D.C.I.T, 402, 4Th Floor, Oscar Apartment, Vs. Central Circle-2, Limda Lane, Rajkot. Jamnagar.

For Appellant: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad, CIT. DR
Section 153C

…Court of Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Dalamia Cement (P) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 (Delhi) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) Once it is established that there is nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the Board of Directors and assume the role to decide how much is reaso…

ACIT 31(1), Mumbai vs. Gundecha Builders, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6053/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri M. Balaganeshacit-31(1) M/S Gundecha Builders, Room No. 111, C-13, 801, Hubtown Solaries, Vs. 1St Floor, B.K.C. Bandra (E), N.S. Phadke Marg, Off Telui Mumbai-400051 Galli, Near Andheri Flyover, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400062. Pan: Aaafg0848E Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Satish Rajore (Sr. Dr) Respondent By : Shri Vimal Punmiya (C.A.) Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.06.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Satish Rajore (Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Vimal Punmiya (C.A.)
Section 143(3)Section 254(1)Section 260A

…the discretion of businessmen as to whether any expenditure should be incurred on the cost of employee or not. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC)], wherein it was held that once it is established that there is nexus between the expenditure and purpose of business, revenue cannot justifiable claim to put itself in the Arm Chain of businessmen and to assume the role of Board of Director to decide how much reasonable expenditure be made. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits 5 IT…

Mdl Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6127/DEL/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2015-16] & [A.Y 2016-17] Mdl Energy Pvt Ltd Vs. The A. C.I.T B-8/14, Vasant Vihar Central Circle – 13, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaccm 7517 K [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Pramita M. Biswas, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ch have been utilised by the subsidiary companies in their respective businesses and, therefore, interest paid has to be allowed u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act as per the ration laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) and Reliance Industries 410 ITR 466. The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the assessee was having sufficient own funds to make investment and, therefore, on this count also, no disallowance can be made. 13. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities. It is the say of the ld. DR that it is…

Mdl Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 13, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 6126/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2015-16] & [A.Y 2016-17] Mdl Energy Pvt Ltd Vs. The A. C.I.T B-8/14, Vasant Vihar Central Circle – 13, New Delhi New Delhi Pan No: Aaccm 7517 K [Appellant] [Respondent]

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms.Pramita M. Biswas, CIT- DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ch have been utilised by the subsidiary companies in their respective businesses and, therefore, interest paid has to be allowed u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act as per the ration laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 (SC) and Reliance Industries 410 ITR 466. The ld. counsel for the assessee further stated that the assessee was having sufficient own funds to make investment and, therefore, on this count also, no disallowance can be made. 13. Per contra, the ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities. It is the say of the ld. DR that it is…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Punjab Stainless Steel Industries, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 6036/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)

…DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5532/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2012-13) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazirpur Industrial Area Circle-34(1) New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1107/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) ACIT Vs Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Circle-34(1), Room No. 804, B-61, Wazirpur Industrial 8th Floor, E-2 Block, S. P. Area Mukherjee Bhawan New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1147/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazir…

Punjab Stainless Steel Inds., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5532/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)

…DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5532/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2012-13) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazirpur Industrial Area Circle-34(1) New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1107/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) ACIT Vs Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Circle-34(1), Room No. 804, B-61, Wazirpur Industrial 8th Floor, E-2 Block, S. P. Area Mukherjee Bhawan New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1147/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazir…

Punjab Stainless Steel Industries, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1147/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)

…DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5532/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2012-13) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazirpur Industrial Area Circle-34(1) New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1107/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) ACIT Vs Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Circle-34(1), Room No. 804, B-61, Wazirpur Industrial 8th Floor, E-2 Block, S. P. Area Mukherjee Bhawan New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1147/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazir…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Punjab Stainless Steel, Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1107/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 195Section 9(1)(vii)

…DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 5532/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2012-13) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazirpur Industrial Area Circle-34(1) New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1107/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) ACIT Vs Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Circle-34(1), Room No. 804, B-61, Wazirpur Industrial 8th Floor, E-2 Block, S. P. Area Mukherjee Bhawan New Delhi New Delhi AAAFP4223G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 1147/DEL/2016 (A.Y 2011-12) Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. Vs ACIT B-61, Wazir…

ACIT, Circle - 35, Kolkata vs. M/S. Kwality Steel Processors, Kolkata

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

ITA 1411/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravivs M/S. Kwality Steel Processors, Acit, Circle-35, 4, India Exchange Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700107. Kolkata-700001. Pan-Aaefk2197G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh.C.J.Singh, Jcit Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. Miraj D.Shah, Fca Date Of Hearing 05.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 03.05.2019

Section 36(1)

….) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)[2015] 379 ITR 347(SC)are also, I find quite pertinent and cover its case. In the case of before the Hon'ble apex court in Hero Cycles (P) Ltd Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Ludhiana, reported In [2015] 379 ITR 347(SC), equivalent citation [2015] 63 taxmann.com 308 (SC), it has been adjudicated as under: IT : Once it is established that there is nexus between expenditure and purpose of business revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in arm-chair of businessman or in position of Board of Directors and assume role to decide how much is reasonable exp…

Sun Infra, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 14(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2010-2011

ITA 4988/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Sun Infra, The Income Tax Officer 14(3)(4), 288, 3Rd Floor, Kalbadevi Road, Room No. 608, 6Th Floor, Kalbadevi, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400002 Vs. Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Abjfs8245H

For Appellant: Shri Vallabhdas D. Parmar (AR)For Respondent: Shri M.K Singh (Sr.DR)
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 24

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s Sun Infra, The Income Tax Officer 14(3)(4), 288, 3rd Floor, Kalbadevi Road, Room No. 608, 6th Floor, Kalbadevi, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400002 Vs. Mumbai - 400021 PAN: ABJFS8245H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vallabhdas D. Parmar (AR) Revenue by : Shri M.K Singh (Sr.DR) Date of Hearing: 25/01.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 22/04/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 01.0…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3883/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR
Section 142Section 147Section 153Section 153ASection 201(1)Section 36Section 40Section 40A(3)

…, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT v. Reebok India Company[2018] 259 Taxman 100 (Delhi) & Honorable supreme court in Hero Cycles (P) Ltd vs. CIT[2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC) , CIT Vs. S.A. Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 (SC). He further submitted that in any case, assessee has substantial amount of own funds in form of share capital and reserves out of which these advances were paid. This is corroborated from balance sheet as well as statement of cash credit account. It may be submitted that even CIT (A) has accepted f…

Sh. Dharam Pal Aggarwal, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

In the result appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 315/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Sainiassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. A.P. Garg, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…598/. 6.3 Reliance was placed on the following case laws: • CIT(A), Bathinda Vs. Gurdas Garg [2015] 63 Taxmann.com 289 (P&H) • CIT-2 Visakhapatnam Vs. Seven Hills Hospitals (P.) Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 69 (A.P.) • Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. Vs. CIT, Ludhiana [2015] 379 ITR 347 (S.C.) • CIT Vs. Kapsons Associates (2016) 381 ITR 0204 (P&H) 7. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee sustained the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by observing in para 5.2 & 5.3 of the impugned order as under: 5.2 I have considered the observations of the Assessing Officer as made by him in the assessment…

Surya Automobiles Pvt .Ltd., Abohar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-II, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 93/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 92 & 93/(Asr)/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…nds, i.e., during f.y. 2012-13, there is no basis to presume the same being not so, or financed in whole or in part by borrowed capital during the following year (i.e., f.y. 2013-14, relevant to AY 2014-15). The decision in Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC), applied by the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance/s, is thus not applicable on facts. We decide accordingly. 6. In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on April 08, 2019 (N. K. Choudhry) (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Date: 08.04.2019 (AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15) Surya Au…

Surya Automobiles Pvt Ltd, Abohar vs. Assiatant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-II, Bathinda

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed

ITA 92/ASR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi. T. A. Nos. 92 & 93/(Asr)/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…nds, i.e., during f.y. 2012-13, there is no basis to presume the same being not so, or financed in whole or in part by borrowed capital during the following year (i.e., f.y. 2013-14, relevant to AY 2014-15). The decision in Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC), applied by the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance/s, is thus not applicable on facts. We decide accordingly. 6. In the result, the assessee’s appeals are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on April 08, 2019 (N. K. Choudhry) (Sanjay Arora) Judicial Member Accountant Member Date: 08.04.2019 (AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15) Surya Au…

Pioneer Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(3), Hyderabad

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1373/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram dFor Respondent: Shri K.Gopala Krishna
Section 14ASection 27(1)

…rom own funds. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.71,01,080 made M/s. Pioneer Genco Limited u/s 27(1) without appreciating the fact that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles 379 ITR 347 where in it is observed that it is not for the department to dictate as to how the finance should be managed only on the ground that the amount advanced exceeded the reserves and profits. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 4. 2. Ground No.1 & 4 are general in nature which does not require any specific adjudication. 3. Th…

Pioneer Genco Limited., Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(3), Hyderabad

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1372/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri A.V.Raghu Ram dFor Respondent: Shri K.Gopala Krishna
Section 14ASection 27(1)

…rom own funds. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.71,01,080 made M/s. Pioneer Genco Limited u/s 27(1) without appreciating the fact that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles 379 ITR 347 where in it is observed that it is not for the department to dictate as to how the finance should be managed only on the ground that the amount advanced exceeded the reserves and profits. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing. 4. 2. Ground No.1 & 4 are general in nature which does not require any specific adjudication. 3. Th…

Gvk Power & Infrastructure Limited, Kadiyam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Rajahmundry

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 553/VIZ/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/Viz/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/S Gvk Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of D.No.5-48, Gvk Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, Kadiyammandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [Pan :Aaacj5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant By Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.04.2019

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36Section 5

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.553/VIZ/2018 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2014-15) M/s GVK Power & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Asst.Commissioner of D.No.5-48, GVK Power Plant Income Tax Jegurupadu, KadiyamMandal Circle-2(1) East Godavari Rajamahendravaram [PAN :AAACJ5599A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओ रसे/ Appellant…

Rgs Healthcare Private Limited, Mohali vs. DCIT, C-6(1), Mohali

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

ITA 1208/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ 1208/Chd/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Section 250

…in progress. That no fresh loans were taken by the assessee during the year under consideration. The assessee during the year also earned sufficient profits. Relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 379 ITR 347 (SC), the Ld. counsel for assessee submitted that even otherwise, in the case of mixed funds also, the presumption will be that the assessee had used it is own funds for making the investments. The Ld.CIT(A), however, held that since the assessee had used mixed funds, hence notional interest was rightly calculated by the A.O. and thus was rightl…

Smt. Jagjit Kaur Chawla, Mohali vs. DCIT, Mohali

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

ITA 189/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Sr.DR
Section 250(6)Section 36

…e n o f R s . 4 9 . 2 4 l a c s , n o d i s a l l o w a n c e u / s 3 6 ( 1 ) ( i i i ) o f t h e a c t w a s c a l l e d f o r . R e l i a n c e w a s p l a c e d o n t h e f o l l o w i n g c a s e l a w s : 5 A.Y.2011-12 i. Hero Cycles P Ltd. vs. CIT, 379 ITR 347 (SC) ii. Gurdas Garg vs. CIT(A), ITA No.413 of 2014, P&H High Court iii. CIT vs. Kapsons Associates, 381 ITR 204 P&H High Court. iv. Bright Enterprises P Ltd. vs. CIT, 381 ITR 107 P&H High Court. v. CIT vs. Rakesh Gupta, ITA No.37 of 2014 P&H High Court. vi. Aarti Steel Ld. Vs ACIT dtd. 771/2011, Chandigarh Tribunal. vii. Hero Cycles P Ltd. vs CI…