S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT

288 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2007#26 most cited

What is S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

1,484

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT · 288 ITR 1 · Section 36(1)(iii) · commercial expediency · business expediency · interest-free advances · disallowance of interest · onus to prove business purpose · borrowed funds · Revenue interference

Also reported as

158 Taxmann 74158 Taxmann.com 74

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 14ASection 1961Section 148Section 147Section 40(a)(ia)Section 142(1)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

commercial expediencyinterest free advancessection 36(1)(iii)business expediencydisallowance of interest expendituresection 36(1)section 36revenue expendituresection 37(1)section 37capital expendituresection 14a

Judgments citing S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT

The DCIT(OSD) Range-I, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. D. Com Systems Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2580/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Pramod M. Jagtap & T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year : 2010-11 & Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dcit (Osd), Range-1 M/S.D-Com Systems Ltd. Ahmedabad. Vs Shop No.28, 1St Floor Vraj Vihar 6, B/H. Rahul Tower, Off. 100 Ft. Road, Satellite Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaccd 4827 H 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 : 02/03/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/03/2022 आदेश/O R D E R Per T.R. Senthil Kumar: These Are Two Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against Orders Dated 7.7.2014 & 26.05.2016 Passed By The Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Ahmedabad For The Asstt.Years 2010-11 & 2012-13 Respectively. Since Assessee Is Same In Both The Cases, We Proceed To Dispose Of Both The Appeals By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Shri D.K. Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…g. The said JPL has undertaken contract work on behalf of the assessee amounting to Rs.140,59,18,416/-, and investment and loans & advance to the sisters concerns are for the purpose of business. Assessee relied various judgments vis. SA Builders Ltd Vs. CIT, 288 ITR 1, DCIT, Jewel Consumer Care P.Ltd., ITA No.884/Ahd/2009 order dated 21.12.2011 for the proposition that on the ground of commercial expediency, the expenditure can be treated as business expenditure. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of Bombay high Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance utilities, ITA No.1398 of 2008, jurisdictional High C…

M/S Continental Automotive Components India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 129/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year :2014-15 M/S. Continental Automotive Vs. Dcit, Components India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1)(1), Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Industrial Bengaluru. Area, Hosur Road, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru–560 099. Pan : Aakcs 9578 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 92

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year :2014-15 M/s. Continental Automotive Vs. DCIT, Components India Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 2(1)(1), Plot No.53B, Bommasandra Industrial Bengaluru. Area, Hosur Road, Attibele Hobli, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru–560 099. PAN : AAKCS 9578 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. T. Suryanarayana, Senior Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 21.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 O R D E R Per N.…

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)

…e appellant has failed to furnish documentary evidences in order to establish business exigency and business purpose of such interest free advances. The Ld. AR has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC). Since, the appellant has failed to establish business exigency and business purpose of such advances, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon is of no help. 4.4.1. Alternatively, it has been argued that the interest free advances to the subsidiary company were given out of own funds having no interest burden. However, I find tha…

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)

…e appellant has failed to furnish documentary evidences in order to establish business exigency and business purpose of such interest free advances. The Ld. AR has heavily relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC). Since, the appellant has failed to establish business exigency and business purpose of such advances, the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon is of no help. 4.4.1. Alternatively, it has been argued that the interest free advances to the subsidiary company were given out of own funds having no interest burden. However, I find tha…

Sh. Chander Mohan Mehra, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Amritsar

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in the terms indicated as above

ITA 237/ASR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. A. R. Dogra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Satbir Singh, Sr. DR

…en money borrowed to acquire a capital asset or a revenue asset. All that the section requires is that the assesse must borrow capital and the purpose of borrowing must be business. S. A Bulders Ltd. vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and another (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC): It was held- Once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assesse itself), the revenue cannot justifiably claim but put itself in the arm-chair of the business or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how muc…

M.Palanisamy, Coimbatore vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 2, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1642/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: 04.01.2022For Respondent: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 40A(2)(a)

…pret that 75% of the mining expenditure should have been borne by the lessor. The commercial dealings between any two independent parties cannot be dictated by the AO. It has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd., Vs. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 as below: “We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT V. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in…

ACIT Non Corp Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. M.Palanisamy, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1515/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: 04.01.2022For Respondent: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 40A(2)(a)

…pret that 75% of the mining expenditure should have been borne by the lessor. The commercial dealings between any two independent parties cannot be dictated by the AO. It has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd., Vs. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 as below: “We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT V. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in…

ACIT Non Corp Circle 2, Coimbatore vs. M.Palanisamy, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1514/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: 04.01.2022For Respondent: Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 40A(2)(a)

…pret that 75% of the mining expenditure should have been borne by the lessor. The commercial dealings between any two independent parties cannot be dictated by the AO. It has been held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders Ltd., Vs. CIT [2007] 288 ITR 1 as below: “We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT V. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. (2002) 254 ITR 377 that once it is established that there was nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business (which need not necessarily be the business of the assessee itself), the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in…

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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined 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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined 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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined 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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined 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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined 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

…Rs, 83,04,88,4057- . Since, the investments were made to make the subsidiary company financially viable and accordingly, in my considered view, these investments are business investments. Accordingly, as per the ratio of decision of S.A. Builders reported at 288 ITR 1 (S.C.) interest on these advances cannot be disallowed. Further, in the case of Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (2007) 59 Taxman 397, it was held that A.O. was not justified in disallowing interest on interest free advances made to loss making subsidiary company. ITA Nos.1054/Ahd/2012 and 6 others A.Y. 2006-07 22 9.9 In view of the above, I am inclined t…

Perfect Thread Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 349/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble&

For Appellant: Department by Shri Mehul Jain

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & ITA.No. 4903/MUM/2014 (A.Y. 2011-12) M/s. Perfect Thread Mills Limited v. Income Tax Officer – 8(2)(4) 205-A, Trade Corner Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Saki Vihar Road, Saki Naka Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400072 PAN: AAACP6449F (Appellant) (Respondent) None Assessee by : Department by Shri Mehul Jain Date of Hearing : 23.12.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 24.02.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order…

DCIT Circle 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Reliance Industrial Ivestment & Holdings Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal is dismissed

ITA 803/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

…expediency / business exigencies. The case law of CIT V/s United Breweries (89 ITR 17), as referred to by Ld. CIT(A), duly support the said proposition. The same is also supported by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders V/s CIT (288 ITR 1) wherein it was held that it was enough to show that the money was expanded not out of necessity and with a view to direct and immediate benefit but voluntarily and on grounds of commercial expediency and in order to indirectly facilitate the carrying on the business. The expression commercial expediency was of wide import and would include such ex…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Raghu Rama Renewable Energy Limited, Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1083/HYD/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year: 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Vs. Raghu Rama Renewable Of Income Tax, Energy Limited, Circle 3(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaccr0809F. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Samuel Nagadesi Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 17.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Revenue’S Appeal For A.Y. 2015-16 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 28.12.2018 In Case No.375/2017-18/Dcit Cc- 1(2)/Cit(A)-11/2018-19/Hyd, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short, ‘The Act’]. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Revenue’S First & Foremost Substantive Grievance Challenges Correctness Of The Cit(A)’S Action Deleting Section 36(1)(Iii) Interest Expenditure Disallowance Of Rs.17,11,356/- Made By The Assessing Officer In His Assessment Order Dt.29.12.2017. The Cit(A)’S Appellate Discussion To This Affect Reads As Under :

For Appellant: Shri Samuel NagadesiFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…a business failure as long as there is a scope to survive and it is the endeavor of the group as a whole to carryon the business without interruptions". 4.1.2. The assessee relied on the ratio laid down in the following cases : (i) S.A. Builders Ltd. Vs. CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC) (ii) Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (Civil Appeal 514 of 2008) (iii) CIT Vs. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd (Bharath) Ltd 254 ITR 377 (Del). 4.2) I have considered the assessment order submissions of the assessee. The fact that the assessee has taken loans on which interest is being charged whereas the assessee has advanced amounts to sister concer…

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)

…of Radha Swami Sastry vs CIT 193 ITR 321 and CIT vs Excel Industries 358 ITR 295. 15. Moreover, following case laws referred before ld.CIT(A) are germane and support the case of the assessee on merits i).Hon’ble Supreme court decision in S.A. Builders vs CIT 288 ITR 1 has interpreted that the expression "for the purpose of business" includes expenditure voluntarily incurred for commercial expediency and it is immaterial if a third party also benefits thereby. An individual will have a deep interest in the subsidiary /fellow subsidiaries of the holding company in which he has controlling stake and hence there is…

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)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर 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) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ App…

Refex Industries Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 5(3), Chennai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 2939/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (CA) – Ld ARFor Respondent: Shri S. Palani Kumar, Ld. CIT - DR
Section 143(3)Section 32

…e Tribunal had followed the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in CIT Vs Amalgamations P. Ltd (108 ITR 895) which was affirmed by Hon’ble Supreme Court reported at 226 ITR 188. Further, the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders (288 ITR 1) was also applicable wherein it was held that expenditure incurred on commercial expediency in trying to retrieve its investments in subsidiary would be allowable deduction. 4.2 Regarding depreciation on cylinders, it was submitted that the cylinders were earlier sold out and repurchased this year. The Ld. AO mistakenly took this transaction as sal…