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 367,181 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

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Chemical Construction International Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3958/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Circle-3(1), New Delhi Chemical Construction International Pvt. Ltd., 205, Kushal Bazar, 32-33, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan : Aaacc0292M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.Dr Respondent By Sh. A.K. Chadha, Ca Date Of Hearing 28.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2017 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 07/06/2011 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Iv (In Short “Cit-A”) For Assessment Year 2007-08, Raising Following Grounds: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition Of Rs.5614565/- On Account Of Contract Receipts, Ignoring The Fact That During The Assessment Proceedings The Assessee Company Failed To Justify Its Abnormally Low G. P. Rate Of 18.16% In Current Year From 28.9% Last Year. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld.Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting Addition Of Rs.14591310/- On Account Of Payment Of Lurgi Life Science(Lls) Germany For Drawing Design Charges, Ignoring The Fact That Benefit Of Enduring Nature Was Drawn By The Assessee.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…han the interest free amount advanced to the director and sister concern. Thus, in our opinion, no disallowance of interest could have been made in the hands of the assessee. Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders Vs. CIT and another (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC) held that transfer of borrowed funds to sister concern should be seen from the point of view of commercial expediency and not from the point of view whether the amount was advanced for earning profits. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further held that the expression ‘commercial expediency’ is an expression of wide import and include such expenditure…

Prem Raja Yarns, Karur vs. ITO, Karur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the three years stand allowed

ITA 860/CHNY/2015[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Mar 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, V. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. Pan : Aaafp 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sahadevan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर "संह, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/s Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, v. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. PAN : AAAFP 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/…

Prem Raja Yarns, Karur vs. ITO, Karur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the three years stand allowed

ITA 859/CHNY/2015[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Mar 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, V. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. Pan : Aaafp 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sahadevan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर "संह, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/s Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, v. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. PAN : AAAFP 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/…

Prem Raja Yarns, Karur vs. ITO, Karur

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for all the three years stand allowed

ITA 858/CHNY/2015[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Mar 2017AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/S Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, V. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. Pan : Aaafp 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B. Sahadevan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी "ड.एस. सु"दर "संह, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.858, 859 & 860/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 M/s Prem Raja Yarns, The Income Tax Officer, No.11, Main Road, v. Ward – 1(2), Ramakrishnapuram, Karur. Karur. PAN : AAAFP 6640 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/…

Bajargan Traders, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Alwar

In the result, the ground no

ITA 137/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Mar 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C. A)For Respondent: Shri Prem Prakash Meena (JCIT)
Section 133

…e-2, Alwar. the same was given on rent by the assessee. Therefore once commercial expediency for giving the advance is established, no part of the interest expenditure can be disallowed in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of S.A. Builders 288 ITR 1 and Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 where it was held that the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm-chair of the businessman or in the position of the Board of Directors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. It further held that no businessman…

Shah Rukh Khan, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as above

ITA 623/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…self. In the course of his arguments, the Ld. Representative referred to the propositions laid down in the following judgments in support of the case of the assessee :- (i) Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 118 ITR 261(SC) (ii) S.A Builders vs. CIT, 288 ITR 1(SC) (iii) CIT vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiriji, 91 ITR 544 (SC) 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative has reiterated the stand of the Assessing Officer, which we have already noted in the earlier paras. As per the Ld. Departmental Representative, there was no breach of agreement by the assessee and, therefore, he was under n…

Shah Rukh Khan, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, as above

ITA 4763/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Jasbir Chouhan
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…self. In the course of his arguments, the Ld. Representative referred to the propositions laid down in the following judgments in support of the case of the assessee :- (i) Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 118 ITR 261(SC) (ii) S.A Builders vs. CIT, 288 ITR 1(SC) (iii) CIT vs. Dhanrajgiri Raja Narasingiriji, 91 ITR 544 (SC) 6. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative has reiterated the stand of the Assessing Officer, which we have already noted in the earlier paras. As per the Ld. Departmental Representative, there was no breach of agreement by the assessee and, therefore, he was under n…

Creative Labels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5777/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singhcreative Labels Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, 4(1)(2), Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, Room No. 305, Sharaf Mansion, 3Rd Floor, Princess Street, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Kalbadevi, Mumbai-400002. Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aaccc6150G (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj R. Toprani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 253Section 254(1)

…terest. In support of his contention, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of CIT vs. Panipat Woollen & General Mills Co. Ltd. (1976) (103 ITR 66), CIT vs. Dhanrajgiriji (1973) (91 ITR 544) and the decision of S.A. Builders Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) (288 ITR 1). On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of authorities below. 4. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and perused the material available on record. The AO while framing assessment order observed that assessee was incurred expenses outward and letter receiving the reimbursement of such expenses from the…

DCIT Cir 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Global World Power Projects P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7489/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumar: (A.Y : 2011-12) Dcit Cir 3(1)(2) Vs. M/S Global World Power R.No.607, Aayakar Bhavan Projects Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai – 400 020 106 – 107, 10Th Floor Balaji Bhavan, Jamnalal Bajaj Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan : Aadcg9880C (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G Nantha Kumar प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Vipul I Sheth सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 29/12/2016 घोषणा की तारीख Date Of Pronouncement : 10/03/2017

For Appellant: Shri G Nantha KumarFor Respondent: Shri Vipul I Sheth
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. On 3 Global World Power Projects Ltd. ITA No.7489/Mum/2014, A.Y.2011-12 appeal by the Assessee the Ld. CIT (Appeals) deleted the disallowance relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd. Vs CIT [288 ITR 1]. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) allowed the claim of the Assessee holding that in view of Supreme Court’s decision once there is nexus between the expenditure and the purpose of the business is established, the Revenue cannot justifiably claim to put itself in the arm chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role…

Shapoorji Pallanji and Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3053/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacs6994C

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…313 ITR 340 submitted that no disallowance out of interest expenditure is to be made if interest free funds were sufficient to meet the investment made. He further submitted that the Hon 'ble Apex Court has also held in the case of SA. Builders Ltd., vs. CIT, 288 ITR 1 that when loan to its subsidiary is given in the course and for the purpose of business of its business, no disallowance of interest has to be made. He submitted that in view of above decisions, the disallowance of interest is not justified and the same should be deleted. 5.5 On the other hand, ld. D.R relied on the orders of the authorities below…

M/S. G. R. Developers, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1439/BANG/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Mar 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A.K Garodiashri Laliet Kumarg.R Developers, 142-143, 1St Floor, Gr Plaza, D.V.G Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore-. . Appellant Pan No.Aaefg3522F. Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle-3(1), Bangalore. . Respondent * Appellant By : Shri K.R Pradeep, C.A Assessee By : Shri M.K Biju, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 02-02-2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-03-2017

For Appellant: Shri K.R Pradeep, C.A Assessee by : Shri M.K Biju, JCIT
Section 234BSection 8

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, ‘C’, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER G.R Developers, 142-143, 1st Floor, GR Plaza, D.V.G Road, Basavanagudi, Bangalore-. . Appellant PAN No.AAEFG3522F. Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3(1), Bangalore. . Respondent * Appellant by : Shri K.R Pradeep, C.A Assessee by : Shri M.K Biju, JCIT Date of Hearing : 02-02-2017 Date of Pronouncement : 03-03-2017 O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Inco…

The ACIT, 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd., Raisen

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 349/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…Page 1 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016/ A.Y.:10-11&11-12 DCIT vs. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd T.P. A. No. 265/Ind/2015 & 349/Ind/2016/A.Y.:10-11&11-12 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,इ"दौर "यायपीठ ,इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया ,"या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना ,लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं /.T.P.A. No. 157/Ind/2015 &T.P.A. No. 316/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 & A.Y. 2011-12 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. DCIT 1(1) Bhopal Ltd. Vs. (Earlier known a…

M/S Andritz Hydro Private Limited (Earlier Known As V A Tech Hydro Indai Pvt. Ltd.), Mandideep vs. The ACIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 316/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…Page 1 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016/ A.Y.:10-11&11-12 DCIT vs. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd T.P. A. No. 265/Ind/2015 & 349/Ind/2016/A.Y.:10-11&11-12 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,इ"दौर "यायपीठ ,इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया ,"या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना ,लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं /.T.P.A. No. 157/Ind/2015 &T.P.A. No. 316/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 & A.Y. 2011-12 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. DCIT 1(1) Bhopal Ltd. Vs. (Earlier known a…

M/S. Chhaganlal Kishanlal & Co., Burhanpur vs. The ACIT, Khandwa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 646/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

….A. No.646/Ind/2015/A.Y.:10-11 Page 5 of 10 not charged or charged at the lesser rate were given out of interest- free funds available with it. 1.3.1. The Ld. A.R. relying on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) contended that the onus on the revenue to show that interest bearing fund alone were invested in investment on which no income was earned. The Ld. A.R. further relied on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) wherein it was held that where assessee had sufficient profits i…

M/S. Rahul Developers Pvt. Ltd., Burhanpur vs. The ACIT, Khandwa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 645/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

…:10-11 Page 5 of 10 as mentioned in assessment order from whom interest was not charged was given out of interest-free funds available with it. 1.3.1. The Ld. A.R. relying on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) contended that the onus on the revenue to show that interest bearing fund alone were invested in investment on which no income was earned. The Ld. A.R. further relied on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) wherein it was held that where assessee had sufficient profits i…

M/S. Narendra Industries, Burhanpur vs. The ACIT, Khandwa

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

ITA 644/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

…not charged was given out of interest-free funds available with it. M/s. Narenda Industries vs ACIT,Khandwa I.T.A.No. 644/Ind/2015 Page 5 of 10 1.3.1. The Ld. A.R. relying on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) contended that the onus on the revenue to show that interest bearing fund alone were invested in investment on which no income was earned. The Ld. A.R. further relied on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) wherein it was held that where assessee had sufficient profits i…

The DCIT, 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd., Raisen

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 265/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…Page 1 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016/ A.Y.:10-11&11-12 DCIT vs. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd T.P. A. No. 265/Ind/2015 & 349/Ind/2016/A.Y.:10-11&11-12 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,इ"दौर "यायपीठ ,इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया ,"या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना ,लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं /.T.P.A. No. 157/Ind/2015 &T.P.A. No. 316/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 & A.Y. 2011-12 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. DCIT 1(1) Bhopal Ltd. Vs. (Earlier known a…

M/S. Andritz Hydro Private Limited (Earlier Known As Va Tech Hydro India Private Limited), Bhopal vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result, grounds taken by the assessee in all the years with respect to provision of warranty are allowed

ITA 157/IND/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143(3)Section 144C

…Page 1 of 84 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd v DCIT/ T.P.A. No.157/Ind/2015 &316/Ind/2016/ A.Y.:10-11&11-12 DCIT vs. Andritz Hydro Pvt. Ltd T.P. A. No. 265/Ind/2015 & 349/Ind/2016/A.Y.:10-11&11-12 आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण ,इ"दौर "यायपीठ ,इ"दौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE "ी डी.ट".गरा"सया ,"या"यक सद"य तथा "ी ओ.पी.मीना ,लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं /.T.P.A. No. 157/Ind/2015 &T.P.A. No. 316/Ind/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 & A.Y. 2011-12 M/s. Andritz Hydro Pvt. DCIT 1(1) Bhopal Ltd. Vs. (Earlier known a…

M/S. C.K. Cotspin Pvt. Ltd., Burhanpur vs. The DCIT, Khandwa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 816/IND/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

…ed in assessment order from whom interest was not charged or charged at the lesser rate was given out of interest-free funds available with it. 1.3.4. The Ld. A.R. relying on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of S.A. Builders vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1(SC) contended that the onus on the revenue to show that interest bearing fund alone were invested in M/s. C. K. Cotspin Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT-Khandwa/ I.T.A. No.816/Ind/2014/A.Y.:11-12 Page 11 of 23 investment on which no income was earned. The Ld. A.R. further relied on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case Munjal Sales Corporation vs. C…

I.T.O WD - 7(3), Kolkata. vs. M/S Shalini Properties & Developers Private Limited., Kolkata

In the result the appeal preferred by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 171/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 171/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-7(3) -Vs.- M/S. Shalini Properties & Developers Kolkata Pvt. Limited., Kolkata [Pan : Aahcs 7896 N] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 301Section 37(1)

…directors of appellant company to approach M/s Shalini Properties & Developers Pvt. Ltd. For assignment of Dunlop branch name and logo was a commercially prudent decision. (iii) The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SA Builders Ltd Vs CIT (Appeals) (2007) 288 ITR 1 has confirmed the following observation of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on page-9 of the report :- “ We agree with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in CIT v Dalmia Cement (B) 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 busine…