South India Bank Ltd. v. CIT

410 ITR 50High Court2019#20807 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2023.

Judgments citing South India Bank Ltd. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…rovision for bad & doubtful debts is at Rs.7265 crores which far exceeds the claim of bad debts written off at Rs.1296 crores. Therefore the entire claim was not admissible and relied on the decision of Kerala High Court in South India Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 410 ITR 50 (Ker). ” 19. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court while upholding the view of this Tribunal observed as under:- “6. Insofar as question No. 4 is concerned, adverting to section 36(1)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Shri Aravind submitted ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 22 of 31 that the word used in the statute is aggregate average advance…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…rovision for bad & doubtful debts is at Rs.7265 crores which far exceeds the claim of bad debts written off at Rs.1296 crores. Therefore the entire claim was not admissible and relied on the decision of Kerala High Court in South India Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 410 ITR 50 (Ker). ” 19. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court while upholding the view of this Tribunal observed as under:- “6. Insofar as question No. 4 is concerned, adverting to section 36(1)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Shri Aravind submitted ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 22 of 31 that the word used in the statute is aggregate average advance…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…rovision for bad & doubtful debts is at Rs.7265 crores which far exceeds the claim of bad debts written off at Rs.1296 crores. Therefore the entire claim was not admissible and relied on the decision of Kerala High Court in South India Bank Ltd. v. CIT (2019) 410 ITR 50 (Ker). ” 19. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court while upholding the view of this Tribunal observed as under:- “6. Insofar as question No. 4 is concerned, adverting to section 36(1)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Shri Aravind submitted ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 22 of 31 that the word used in the statute is aggregate average advance…

Mohsin Ali Vakil, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-26(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6763/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.6763/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 बनाम Mohsin Ali Vakil Acit D-36 (Basement), Vs. Circle 26(1) South Extension, Part-Ii, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaxpv2510R अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 14A

…end of the year and, therefore, no disallowance is warranted under Rule 8D(2)(ii). Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Limited Vs. CIT (Civil Appeal No. 9606 of 2011 dated 09.09.2021) reported in 410 ITR 50. Referring to para 20 of the judgment the Ld. Counsel submits that the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that if investments in securities are made out of common funds and if non-interest bearing funds available with the assessee are more than the investments made in tax free securities disallowance under section 14A cannot be made. Ld. Counsel for t…