Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT

298 ITR 298Supreme Court of India2008#492 most cited

What is Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court approves the mixed fund theory, holding that no interest disallowance is warranted under section 36(1)(iii) if investments or advances are made from the assessee's own non-interest bearing funds, even when mixed funds are available. This presumption applies when non-interest bearing funds are sufficient to meet the investments.

191

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Munjal Sales Corporation v CIT · 298 ITR 298 · Section 36(1)(iii) · disallowance of interest expenditure · mixed fund theory · interest free advances · non-interest bearing funds · business expediency · Section 14A disallowance · rule of consistency

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 32(1)(ii)Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest free advancessection 36(1)(iii)business expediencydisallowance of interest expenditurerule of consistencydisallowance u/s 14asection 36section 36(1)section 14adisallowance under section 14adouble taxationsection 37

Judgments citing Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT

Addl . CIT, Special Range- 4, New Delhi vs. Gaursons Realty Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2662/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Gupta, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)

…e working capital for meeting any cash loses. It is further required to be noted that the above decision relied up on by the ld AO has also been impliedly overruled by Hon Supreme court in case of Munjal Sales Coproration V CIT 2008] 168 Taxman 43 (SC)/[2008] 298 ITR 298 (SC)/[2008] 215 CTR 105 (SC). 18. Therefore, on the basis of our above finding we hold that investment made by the assessee in Gaursons Realtech Pvt Ltd of Rs. 53.22 crores and advance of Rs. 79.65 crores totaling to Rs. 132.87 crores is given by the assessee for the purpose of the business of the assessee and no disallowance of interest on these…

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)

…the case of Torrent Financers V. ACIT, 73 TTJ 624 (Ahd), judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT V. Prem Heavy Engineering Works P. Ltd., 285 ITR 554 (All.), and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation V. CIT, 298 ITR 298 (SC).” a. As regards the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act, the appellant submits that there was no tax-free income earned by the appellant during the year as no dividend income has been received from both the Indian subsidiaries. Also, no expenditure was incurred by the appellant in investing in the subsidiary companies. Since the…

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)

…the case of Torrent Financers V. ACIT, 73 TTJ 624 (Ahd), judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT V. Prem Heavy Engineering Works P. Ltd., 285 ITR 554 (All.), and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation V. CIT, 298 ITR 298 (SC).” a. As regards the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act, the appellant submits that there was no tax-free income earned by the appellant during the year as no dividend income has been received from both the Indian subsidiaries. Also, no expenditure was incurred by the appellant in investing in the subsidiary companies. Since the…

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)

…the case of Torrent Financers V. ACIT, 73 TTJ 624 (Ahd), judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT V. Prem Heavy Engineering Works P. Ltd., 285 ITR 554 (All.), and the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation V. CIT, 298 ITR 298 (SC).” a. As regards the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act, the appellant submits that there was no tax-free income earned by the appellant during the year as no dividend income has been received from both the Indian subsidiaries. Also, no expenditure was incurred by the appellant in investing in the subsidiary companies. Since the…

M/S Traditional Gallery Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 108/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 May 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s, had made addition towards the notional interest which is not permissible under the provisions of IT Act. The ld. A/R placed reliance on the following judgments : CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT & Others 298 ITR 298 (SC) The ld. A/R further submitted that assessee was holding funds from various sources. At this juncture, our attention was invited to Note 2.3 of Balance Sheet, i.e. Long Term borrowings, and Note 2.5 i.e. Short term borrowings, from perusal of which it is evident that assessee has certain loans which are specific purposes, i.e. Loan from SI…

M/S Traditional Gallery Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 107/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 May 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…s, had made addition towards the notional interest which is not permissible under the provisions of IT Act. The ld. A/R placed reliance on the following judgments : CIT vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. 410 ITR 466 (SC) Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT & Others 298 ITR 298 (SC) The ld. A/R further submitted that assessee was holding funds from various sources. At this juncture, our attention was invited to Note 2.3 of Balance Sheet, i.e. Long Term borrowings, and Note 2.5 i.e. Short term borrowings, from perusal of which it is evident that assessee has certain loans which are specific purposes, i.e. Loan from SI…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

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

ITA 926/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the interest-free funds are lesser than the interest-free advances. The CIT(A) has properly given part relief thereby directing the Assessing Officer to work out the proportionate interest on specific formula…

The ACIT, (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1118/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 May 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…630 (Guj) - CIT vs. Gujarat Power Corporation Limited – 352 ITR 583 (Guj) - CIT vs. Hitachi Home & Life Solutions (I) Ltd. – (2014) 41 taxmann.com 540 (Guj) - CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited – 313 ITR 340 (Bom) - Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT – 298 ITR 298 (SC) 26. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is not disputed by the Revenue that the interest-free funds are lesser than the interest-free advances. The CIT(A) has properly given part relief thereby directing the Assessing Officer to work out the proportionate interest on specific formula…

M/S. United Spirits Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(1), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2701/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 : Asst.Year 2013-2014 M/S.United Spirits Limited The Deputy Commissioner Of Ub Towers, Income-Tax, Circle 7(1)(1) V. No.24 Vittal Mallya Road Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 001. Pan : Aaccm8043J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior Advocate Respondent By : Sri.Pradeep Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022 Date Of Hearing : 24.03.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, Jm : This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against Final Assessment Order Dated 12.10.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Of The I.T.Act. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2013-2014. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are As Follows: The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Manufacture & Sale Of Alcoholic Beverage. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2013-2014 On 28.11.2013 Which Was Selected For Scrutiny Assessment. During The Course Of Assessment, The Assessee’S Case Was Also Referred To The Transfer Pricing Officer (Tpo). The Tpo Vide Order Dated 26.10.2016, Recommended Transfer Pricing Adjustments. The A.O., Thereafter, Passed A Draft Assessment Order Dated 30.12.2016. 2 It(Tp)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/S.United Spirits Limited.

For Appellant: Sri.Percy Pardiwala, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234CSection 36(1)(iii)

…ned AO/ Hon'ble DRP has erred in relying on the decisions of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana HC in the case of CIT v. Abhishek Limited reported in 286 ITR 1 which has been overruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation reported in 298 ITR 298 5.10. The Hon'ble DRP has erred in placing reliance on the 9 IT(TP)A No.2701/Bang/2017 M/s.United Spirits Limited. decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Harrisons Malayalam Limited reported in 25 taxmann.com 546 as the same is distinguishable on facts that in the Appellant' case as the advances were not made out of borrowed funds 5.11.…

Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 993/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2012-13 Aarvee Denims & Exports Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) 191, Shahwadi, Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Old Octroi Naka Narol-Sarkhej Highway Ahmedabad 382 405. Pan : Aabca 6019 P Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Aarvee Denims & Exports Ahmedabad. Vs Ahmedabad 382 405. Pan : Aabca 6019 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against Order Dated 30.3.2016 Passed By Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] In Appeal No.Cit(A)-1/Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1)/738/2014-15 Relating To The Assessment Year 2012-13. We Dispose Of Both The Appeals By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…36(1)(Hi) cannot be applied as presumption in such a case is that acquisition is out of interest free funds available with the assessee. Having regard to the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corp vs. CIT 298 ITR 298 in which it was observed that where the profits earned during the year are sufficient to cover interest free ITA No.993 and 1553/Ahd/2016 advance, such profit is to be considered as available own interest free funds, the ground of the appellant deserves to be accepted as the net cash profit for the year under consideration is more than 47 Crore…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, while that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1553/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2012-13 Aarvee Denims & Exports Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) 191, Shahwadi, Vs Ahmedabad. Nr.Old Octroi Naka Narol-Sarkhej Highway Ahmedabad 382 405. Pan : Aabca 6019 P Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1) Aarvee Denims & Exports Ahmedabad. Vs Ahmedabad 382 405. Pan : Aabca 6019 P अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/(Respondent) Assessee By : Shri D.K. Parikh, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: These Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue Are Against Order Dated 30.3.2016 Passed By Ld.Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1, Ahmedabad [For Short “Ld.Cit(A)] In Appeal No.Cit(A)-1/Dcit, Cir.1(1)(1)/738/2014-15 Relating To The Assessment Year 2012-13. We Dispose Of Both The Appeals By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…36(1)(Hi) cannot be applied as presumption in such a case is that acquisition is out of interest free funds available with the assessee. Having regard to the judgments of the Supreme Court in the case of Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corp vs. CIT 298 ITR 298 in which it was observed that where the profits earned during the year are sufficient to cover interest free ITA No.993 and 1553/Ahd/2016 advance, such profit is to be considered as available own interest free funds, the ground of the appellant deserves to be accepted as the net cash profit for the year under consideration is more than 47 Crore…

Diamines & Chemicals Ltd., Vadodara vs. DCIT Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2275/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr DR
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ree funds to the sister concern. Since, there was direct nexus between the interest free advances given to the subsidiary company and borrowed funds, the decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR are distinguishable on facts. In the case of Munjal Sales Corporation 298 ITR 298 (SC) strongly relied upon by the Ld. AR, disallowance of interest was deleted since, the advances to the sister concern were given out of own funds of the firm. Infact, the ratio laid down in the following cases support the cases of revenue:- a) CIT vs Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. (2012) 25 taxmann.com 546 (Ker): After referring to the decision of th…

Diamines & Chemicals Ltd., Vadodara vs. ITO, Ward-1(1)(3), Vadodara

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2274/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr DR
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(iii)

…ree funds to the sister concern. Since, there was direct nexus between the interest free advances given to the subsidiary company and borrowed funds, the decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR are distinguishable on facts. In the case of Munjal Sales Corporation 298 ITR 298 (SC) strongly relied upon by the Ld. AR, disallowance of interest was deleted since, the advances to the sister concern were given out of own funds of the firm. Infact, the ratio laid down in the following cases support the cases of revenue:- a) CIT vs Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. (2012) 25 taxmann.com 546 (Ker): After referring to the decision of th…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1600/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

Nirma Chemical Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1190/AHD/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1209/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1208/AHD/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1057/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

Nirma Chemicals Works Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-5, Ahmedabad

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1056/AHD/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vijaykumar Jaiswal, CIT, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Abhishek Industries Ltd., reported at 286 ITR 1 (P & H). In this regard it is observed that the observations made in the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd., stands reversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Munjal Sales Corporation reported at 298 ITR 298. Thus, as on today reliance cannot be placed on the case of Abhishek Industries Ltd..(supra). In view of the above decisions, I hold that the A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest without establishing nexus between interest bearing funds and interest free funds advanced to sister concerns. 9.6 It is well settled law that burden is on t…

ACIT -2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Jayant Dattatray Mhaiskar, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 510/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 24Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 510/Mum/2021 (Assessment Year 2017-18) Vs. Jayant Dattatray ACIT-2(2)(1) Room No.545, 5th Floor Mhaiskar Aaykar Bhawan 410, Boomergang, M.K.Road-400020 Chandivali Farm Road Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 072 PAN : AABCJ8752C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Hema Katariya Department by Shri S.N.Kabra Date of Hearing 02.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement 16.02.2022 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-t…