How many judgments cite Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT?

26 judgments on BharatTax cite Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT (147 ITR 392), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 1961 - Sections 14A, Section 1962 - Rule 8D, Section 22, Section 23, Section 23(1)(c).

147 ITR 392High Court1984#4558 most cited

What is Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Where an assessee has sufficient own funds exceeding its investments, a presumption arises that investments were made out of interest-free funds, preventing disallowance of interest expenses.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT · 147 ITR 392 · interest disallowance · mixed funds · interest free funds · own funds · investment · mixed fund theory · borrowing costs

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961 - Sections 14A Section 1962 - Rule 8D Section 22 Section 23 Section 23(1)(c)Section 23(5)Section 80-IA(5)

Issues it is cited on

section 80ia(8)weighted deduction section 10(34)section 35(2ab)section 194h section 80ic section 194j section 40a(2)(b)section 2(22)transactional net margin method section 2(22)(e)section 40a(2)

Judgments citing Indian Explosives Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Circle - 4, Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Tea Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 2105/KOL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Feb 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: S/Shri Manish Sheth & Prasun Kr. Maity, ARsFor Respondent: N o n e

Section 143(3)

…he following decisions in support of its proposition :- (a) Woolcombers of India Ltd vs CIT reported in (1982) 134 ITR 219 (Cal) (b) Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd vs CIT reported in (1982) 135 ITR 698 (Cal) (c ) Indian Explosives Ltd vs CIT reported in (1983) 147 ITR 392 (Cal) Tata Tea Ltd. (New Name Tata Global Beverage Ltd.), AY 2004-05 The ld CITA relying on the earlier order of his predecessor for the Asst Year 2000-01 confirmed the disallowance of notional interest amounting to Rs. 118.71 lakhs. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us on the following grounds:- “1a. That on the facts and in the circum…

DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Steel Processing & Distribution Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 379/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…assessee’s own funds.— Woolcombers of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1981) 23 CTR (Cal) 204 : (1982) 134 ITR 219 (Cal), CIT vs. Samuel Osborn (India) Ltd. (1982) 26 CTR (Cal) 294 : (1982) 135 ITR 699 (Cal), Indian Explosives Ltd. vs. CIT (1983) 35 CTR (Cal) 244 : (1984) 147 ITR 392 (Cal), Alkali & Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1986) 50 CTR (Cal) 139 : (1986) 161 ITR 820 (Cal) and Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd. vs. CIT (1982) 26 CTR (Cal) 24 : (1982) 135 ITR 698 (Cal) followed. ITA Nos.1124/Kol/2010 & C.O.No.78/Kol/2010 A.Y. 2006-07 DCIT. Cir-8, Kol. vs. M/s Tata Ryerson Ltd. ITA Nos.379&303/Kol/2012 A.Y.2008-…

Tata Steel Processing and Distribution Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 303/KOL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Tata Ryerson Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both appeals of Revenue are dismissed and that of assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose and CO of assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 1124/KOL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year:2006-07

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…has been held in the case of mixed pool of funds, a presumption 69 of utilization of borrowed funds or interest free funds can be made in favour of the assessee: East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT: 224 ITR 627 (SC) Indian Explosives Ltd. V. CIT: 147 ITR 392 (Cal.), Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT: 134 ITR 219 (Cal.) approved by Supreme Court in the case of East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. CIT: 224 ITR 627 CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.: 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) CIT v. M/s Ashok Commercial Enterprises: ITA No. 2985 of 2009 (Bom) Alkali & Chemical Corp. of India v. CIT (1986) 161 ITR 8…

M/S Bharti Teletech Limited vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1)

ITA 753/DEL/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.K. Jaiswal, DR

Section 143(2)Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…d. It is thus submitted that considering the fact that AO has also not brought on record any material to show the nexus no disallowance was to be made. In its support the appellant has relied on the judgement of Calcutta High Court in case of Indian Explosive 147 ITR 392, Woolcom Bers 134 ITR 219 and British Paints 190 ITR 196. The appellant has also submitted that except for payment of interest to Bharti enterprises all other interest was paid on secured loans as well as against overdraft facilities. According to the appellant it was also in the business of advancing and that it had earned income by way of inter…