MUNJAL SALES CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR.

298 ITR 288Supreme Court of India2008#10225 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also reported as

215 CTR 105

Judgments citing MUNJAL SALES CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR.

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)

…eting 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 advances can be made. F…

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

ITA/952/2017HC Karnataka16 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 195Section 260Section 40

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.199 OF 2017 C/W I.T.A. NO.951 OF 2017 & I.T.A. NO.952 OF 2017 I.T.A. NO.199 OF 2017 BETWEEN: 1. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE. 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(1) BMTC COMPLEX KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE. .... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. E.R. INDRAKUMAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/S. TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., NO.331-336,…

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

ITA/951/2017HC Karnataka16 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 195Section 260Section 40

PR. COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S TALLY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD.,

In the result, the appeals fail and are hereby

ITA/199/2017HC Karnataka16 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 195Section 260Section 40

M/S. MITTAL CLOTHING COMPANY,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(2)(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 2308/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014 – 15

For Appellant: Shri V Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, JCIT (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 250

…n’ble Supreme Court in case of Munilal Sales Corporation vs CIT reported in decision relied upon by Ld.CIT(A) of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, the same has been reversed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Munilal sales Corporation vs CIT reported in 298 ITR 288. 13. Respectfully following the above view, the view taken by Ld.CIT(A) deserves to be reversed. We direct Ld.AO to delete the disallowance of interest made under section 36(iii) of the Act amounting to Rs.27,59,642/-. Accordingly grounds raised by assessee stands allowed. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in…

DCIT, CIR-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S CORE HEALTH CARE LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1968/AHD/2017[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jan 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri S. N. Soparkar, AR

Section 36(1)(iii)

…5 lakhs only, the Appellate Tribunal ought to have held that the loan given was from the assessee's own funds. ITA Nos. 1968 & 1969/Ahd/2017 8 . A.Ys. 2004-05 & 2005-06 Decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Munjal Sales Corporation v. CIT [2008] 298 ITR 288 and CIT v. Munjal Sales Corporation [2008] 298 ITR 294 reversed on the facts.)” 13. And further stated that similar issue was decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in appellant’s own case which we have discussed in earlier ground. Therefore, in our considered opinion, same does not require any kind of interference at our end. We hold…

GANESH BHASKARRAO MANEDESHMUKH,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

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

ITA 928/PUN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Pawan V. AutiFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma

Section 143(2)Section 14A

…re own interest free funds are more than the loans and advances no disallowance of interest is to be made. In support of his submissions the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Munjal Sales Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., 215 CTR 105 (SC); ii. Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 379 ITR 347 (SC); iii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Reliance Utility and Power Ltd., 178 Taxman 135 (Bombay). 4. On the other hand Shri Achal Sharma representing the Department vehemently defended the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in confirming the addition. The…

ITO, SUNAM HQ SANGRUR vs. M/S SHREE BHAGWATI RICE MILLS, KHANOURI

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of

ITA 1279/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak AnandFor Respondent: Sh. J.K. Garg

Section 145(3)

…the assessee submitted that the assessee has its own capital of Rs. 72,62,060/- and if the interest component is calculated @12% it would also amount to Rs. 8,71,440/-. Ld. AR further relied on the judgments in case of M/s Munjal Sales Corporation Vs. CIT 215 CTR 105 for the proposition that interest free loan if less than the own funds, no disallowance is called for. Similarly in case of TATA Chemical Ltd. Vs. ACIT 138 ITD 458 Mumbai ITAT held that the Addition of notional interest towards borrowing is not justified where assessee’s own fund were sufficient to cover the loan given to certain parties. 8.…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. FEDERAL MOGUL GOETZE INDIA LTD., DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3441/DEL/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Apr 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Pradeep Dinsdia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 147oSection 263Section 43Section 43BSection 44A

…est on the ground that assessee had sufficient funds which was interest free advances given to its subsidiary. He also relied upon various decision including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT reported in (2008) 298 ITR 288 Page 11 of 14 wherein the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Abhishek Industries Ltd. (supra) has been reversed. 13. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of relevant finding given in the impugned order, we find that the proportionate disallowance of interest of Rs. 97,42,800/- has been made by the Assessing Of…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BRINDAVAN BEVERAGES PVT LTD

In the result ground 4 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA/67/2015HC Karnataka26 Oct 2016

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Section 14ASection 14aSection 260

…bunal has found that the decision upon which reliance has been placed by the Revenue in the case of PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT IN ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES LTD., is already reversed by the Apex Court in the case of 8 MUNILAL SALES CORPN. VS. CIT 298 ITR 288 and further the Tribunal has also found that the stand of the assessee is supported by the decision of MUMBAI HIGH COURT in the case of RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD., (313 ITRR 340) as well as Gujarat High Court in the case of RAGHUVIR SYNTHETICS LTD (354 ITR 222). 7. In our view, when both the issues are covered by the decisions…

VAYUPUTRA REALTY P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 5330/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Vayuputra Realty Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner Of Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar, Income Tax, Ward -8(3), Off. J. V. Link Road, Jogeshwari Aayakar Bhavan, (E), Mumbai 400 060 M. K. Road, Mumbai Pan: Aaccv 5323 Q Appellant .. Respondent

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of borrowed funds. 11. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Munjal Sales Corporation Vs. CIT [298 ITR 298 (SC)] has reversed the findings of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in that assessee’s case and appeal filed by the Revenue against the assessee reported in 298 ITR 288 & 294 respectively. The Hon’ble Supreme Court have allowed the appeal of the assessee against the disallowance of interest under section 36 (1) (iii) of the Act in view of the profits earned by the assessee against which interest free loan of Rs.5 lacs being advanced to the sister concern. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Cou…