How many judgments cite Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

361 judgments on BharatTax cite Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (379 ITR 347), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 36(1)(iii), Section 147, Section 1961, Section 143(2), Section 14A.

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 147 Section 1961 Section 143(2)Section 14A Section 132 Section 142(1)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest free advances commercial expediency section 36(1)(iii)corporate guarantee business expediency section 36 book profits section 36(1)arm's length price transfer pricing adjustment associated enterprises section 92c

Judgments citing Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Asstt. CIT, Cir- 7, Nagpur vs. M/S. Newquest Corporation Ltd., Chandrapur

ITA 328/NAG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The Acit Vs. M/S.Newquest Corporation Ltd. Circle-7, (Now Known As M/S. Avantha Nagpur Holding Ltd. Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur Pan No.:Aabcb 6134 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani (Adv.)For Respondent: ShriPiyushKolhe (CIT-DR)

Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM Assessment Year: 2008-2009 The ACIT Vs. M/s.Newquest Corporation Ltd. Circle-7, (now known as M/s. Avantha Nagpur Holding Ltd. Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur PAN No.:AABCB 6134 E Appellant Respondent ITA No. 329 & 330/NAG/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 & 2010-11 The ACIT Vs. M/s. Avantha Holdings Ltd Circle-7, (earlier known as Nagpur Newquest Corporation Ltd) Ballalrpur Paper Mills P.O. Ballarpur, Distt. Chandrapur PAN No.:AABCB 6134 E Appellant Respondent Revenue by :Shri…

O3 Capital Global Advisory Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 931/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri G.S. Prashanth, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

…tal loss of Rs.4,43,24,751/- incurred on sale of shares of M/s. Morpheus Capital Advisors Pvt. Ltd. under the facts & circumstances of the case. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles (P) Ltd vs. CIT reported in 379 ITR 347 wherein it was observed as follows: “.............. ... 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 Direc…

M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to Ajitnath Hi-Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5022/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…1 ITA 5021/Mum/2019 ITA 5022/Mum/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A No.5021/Mum/2019 - A.Y. 2013-14 I.T.A No.5022/Mum/2019 - A.Y. 2014-15 M/s Macrotech Developers Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner of Income- (Successor to Ajitnath Hi-Tech tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai Room No.655, 6th Floor, Aayakar Builders Private Limited), 412 Floor-4, 17G, Vardhman Chamber Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Mumbai-400 020 Circle, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 PAN : AAGCA1122Q APPELLANT RE…

M/S. Macrotech Developers Ltd (Successor to Ajitnath Hi-Tech Builders Pvt. Ltd), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5021/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh () & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ()

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

M/S. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

…issue in SA Builders is pending for consideration before a larger bench in CIT v. Tulip Star Hotels Ltd. The Appellant submits that the Supreme Court has referred to its earlier judgement in SA Builders and applied its ratio in Hero Cycles (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (379 ITR 347)(SC) where the Supreme Court observed that the assessee had advanced an amount to its subsidiary company without charging any interest and had also advanced an amount to its directors charging a lower interest rate of 10%. The amount advanced to its subsidiary and directors was borrowed from banks and interest thereon was paid by the assessee a…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. ACIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. DCIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)

Section 40A(2)(b)

Lodha Developers Ltd(Formerly Known As Lodha Developers Private Limited), Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2349/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Blemacrotech Developers Limited V. Dcit – Central Circle – 7(3) {Erstwhile Lodha Developers Limited} Room No. 655, 6Th Floor 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai – 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacl1490J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit – Central Circle – 7(3) V. Macrotech Developers Limited Room No. 655, 6Th Floor {Erstwhile Lodha Developers Limited} 412, 4Th Floor, 17G Vardhaman Chamber Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Circle Mumbai – 400020 Fort, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacl1490J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora &For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 37(1)

…t in subsidiary for strategic purpose should be allowable as deduction. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: (i). S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT [SC] 288 ITR 1 (Refer Page 335 to 341 of the paperbook) (ii). Hero Cycles (P) Ltd [SC] [2015] 379 ITR 347 (iii). CIT vs. Reliance Communications Infrastructure Lts. [Bom HC] [2012] 254 CTR 251 6 ITA NO. 2349 & 2148/MUM/2018 (A.Y. 2014-15) Macrotech Developers Limited (iv). CIT vs. Daimia Cement Bharat Ltd. [Del HC} [2011] 330 ITR 595 d) Without prejudice to the above submissions, the assessee would also like to submit that the AO for the AY 2015-16…

M/S Malbros Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Faridkot vs. DCIT, Circle -II, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 379/CHANDI/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR

Section 14ASection 251(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “SMC” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.379/CHD/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s Malbros Enterprises P.Ltd., Vs The DCIT, Near Qilla Chowk, Central Circle-II, Faridkot. Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: AAECM7096F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by: Shri Sudhir Sehgal राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 11.04.2022 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश/Order The p…

ACIT, Ludhiana vs. M/S K Lal Overseas Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 174/CHANDI/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA, Shri AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT-DR

Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)

…chinery was less than Rs. 2 Crores. The ld. counsel has submitted that since own funds of the assessee were sufficient to meet investment, therefore, as per the settled law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'Hero Cycles P. Ltd Vs. CIT', 379 ITR 347 (SC), Hon'ble Punjab & ITA No. 165 &174-Chd-2020 A.Y. 2012-13 Page 26 of 29 Haryana High Court in the case of 'Bright Enterprises Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT', 381 ITR 107 and of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court on in the case of 'CIT Vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.' 313 ITR 340 wherein the Hon'ble Courts have held that where the own funds of the ass…

M/S K.Lall Overseas, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Circle-6, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 165/CHANDI/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA, Shri AdityaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Nangia, CIT-DR

Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)

Ranjani Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 5(4), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 3099/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Halen Ruby Jesintha (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)

…n grounds of commercial expediency. Further, the expression ’for the purpose of business’ is wider in scope than the expression ‘for the purpose of earning profits’. This decision has subsequently been followed by Hon’ble Court in Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd vs CIT (379 ITR 347). We find that the ratio of these decisions is applicable to the facts of the case considering the arguments of the revenue that that the provisions of Sec. 36(1)(iii) have been invoked. Viewed from any angle, the additions as made by Ld. AO is not sustainable. We order so. The Ld. AO is directed to re-compute assessee’s income by deleting the im…

Acme Chem Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir. 10(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 393/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.393/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acme Chem Ltd...........................................………….………………….……Appellant 9A Saket Apartment, 2 Ho Chi Minh Saranai, Kolkata - 700071. [Pan:Aacca3931B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata..…….…..…...............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 22, 2022 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 02, 2022 Hearing Through Video Conferencing Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.08.2021 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Raised In This Appeal Is Regarding The Validity Of The Disallowance Made/Confirmed By The Lower Authorities U/S 14A R.W. Rule 8D(2)(Ii) & 8D(2)(Iii) Of The I.T Rules On Account Of Expenditure Incurred For Earning Of Tax Exempt Income. 3. So Far As The Disallowance U/S 14A Of The Act R.W. Rule 8D(2)(Ii) Of The I.T. Rules Is Concerned, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Had Sufficient Owned Funds To Meet The Investments. He, In This Respect, Has Relied Upon The Balance Sheet Of The Assessee For The Year Under Consideration To Submit That The Assessee Had Share Capital Of Rs.5.86 Crores & Reserve & Surplus Of Rs.77.91 Crores As On 31.03.2013 & These Were Share Capital Of Rs.5.86 Crores & Reserve & Surplus Of Rs.81.93 Crores As On 31.03.2014. He Has Further Invited Our Attention To The Details Of

Section 14ASection 250

…Assessee Banks in those situations where, interest free/own funds available with the Assessee, exceeded the investments. Further reliance in this case can also been placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycle (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 (SC) and also the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT (LTU) vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 466 (SC) wherein it has been held that if the assessee is possessed of sufficient interest free funds to meet the investments, then, under the circumstances presumption will be that the interest free advances/investments ha…

G.E.T Water Solutions Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Company Circle 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 978/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.978/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S.G.E.T.Water Solutions Pvt. Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.1/134, Dhanakoti Raja Street, Income Tax, Sundar Nagar, Company Circle-2(1), Ekkattuthangal, Chennai. Chennai-600 032. [Pan: Aabcn 1835 E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.N.V.Balaji, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan

Section 36(1)(iii)

…the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had reiterated its arguments taken before the AO in light of certain judicial precedents including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2015] 379 ITR 347 (SC) and argued that loans and advances given to groups/subsidiary companies in the course of normal business of the assessee, cannot be considered as diversion of funds for non-business purpose to disallow interest :: 4 :: u/s.36(1)(iii) of the Act. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee, rejected arguments of…

Gopal Das Estates & Housing Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2576/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23

…High Court of Delhi has held as under:- 70. “The Assessee's case appears to be supported by the decisions in SA Builders v. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1/158 Taxman 74 (SC) which has been followed in Hero Cycles v. CIT [2015] 63 taxrnann.com 308/(2016) 236 Taxman 447/379 ITR 347 (SC). The ratio of the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Lokhandwala Constructions Industries Ltd. [2003] 260 ITR 579/131 Taxman 810 (Bom) was rightly relied upon by the ITAT to allow the plea of the Assessee and treat the said interest payments as revenue expenditure. As explained in CIT v. Bombay Samacltar Ltd. [1969] 74 ITR 723 (Bom)…

Tata Realty and Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Ast CIT 2(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 763/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

…of advancing of interest free fund to these group companies. She has also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sridev Enterprises Vs. CIT (1991) 192 ITR 165 (Kar), and decision of the Hero Cycle P. Ltd. VS. CIT (2015) 379 ITR 347 and S.A. Builder Ld. Vs. CIT(A) (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC) & CIT Vs. Reliance Communications Infrastructure Ltd. (2013) 260 ITR 159 (Bombay ITA Nos. 763 &730/Mum/2020 A.Y. 2015-16 9 Tata Realty & Infrastructure Limited Vs. ACIT 2(3)(1) High Court). We find that judicial pronouncement referred by the ld. counsel in the case of Commissioner of Income…

Jt CIT(OSD) 2(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Tata Realty and Infrastructure Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 730/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Sanjeev Kashyap

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)

Gvk Transportation Private Limited, Secunderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 311/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2012-13 Gvk Transportation Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Private Limited, Income Tax, Secunderabad. Circle – 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aadcg5295P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Khyati Chadda Revenue By: Shri Yvst Sai. Date Of Hearing: 06.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.01.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Assessee’S Appeal For A.Y. 2012-13 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 28.07.2016 In Ita No.0049/2015-16, Involving Proceedings U/S. 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short, ‘The Act’]. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused.

For Appellant: Ms. Khyati ChaddaFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ugned expenditure to have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of its own business. The assessee’s case on the other hand, quoted hon’ble apex court’s landmark decisions 3 in SA Builders Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) and Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 that commercial expediency is not merely restricted to assessee’s own business but also includes its subsidiaries’ business activities as well. Be that as it may, we note that CIT(A)’s order has simply brushed aside the assessee’s contentions without examining the clinching commercial expediency in the impugned interest expenditure. We therefore…

M/S. Anabond Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle - 1 (1), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 621/CHNY/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri B. Ramakrishna (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…see. Therefore, it could safely be concluded that the investments were out of commercial expediency and therefore, no interest disallowance could be made in such a case as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. V/s CIT (63 Taxmann.com 308). The favorable decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Pr. CIT V/s Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. (98 Taxmann.com 401) would also be applicable to the fact of the case. This case has already considered the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd. V/s CIT (288 ITR 1) which held that once it was established that there…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Futurz Next Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3556/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Satpal Gulati, CIT, DR

Section 132Section 142Section 153A

…disallowed u/s 36(l)(iii) of the Act. (iii) In alternate, assessee has also submitted that in light of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT (A) 2007 (158) Taxmann 74 SC and M/s Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 2015 (63 Taxmann.com 308 SC), no disallowance can be made u/s 36(l)(iii) of the Act, if the money is advanced to group concerns, is on account of commercial expediency and accordingly, interest paid on borrowed funds to the extent of advanced to group concerns, is allowable expense u/s 36(l)(iii). 12 From the above, it is a undisputed fact, that, the A.O. has disa…