South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT

438 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2021#133 most cited

What is South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The mixed fund theory is affirmed, holding that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A can be made if the assessee possesses sufficient non-interest bearing funds, such as capital and reserves, to cover investments made in tax-free securities.

497

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT · South Indian Bank · 438 ITR 1 · Section 14A · disallowance of interest expenditure · mixed fund theory · non-interest bearing funds · tax-free investments · exempt income · Section 8D · expenditure relating to exempt income

Also reported as

130 Taxmann.com 178283 Taxmann 17810 SCC 153228 CTR 440

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 153ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(33)section 80absection 10(15)section 80msection 54esection 14a(1)section 36(1)(viii)section 54ecsection 14a(2)section 36(1)(vii)disallowance under section 14adisallowance of interest expenditure

Judgments citing South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT

ASST CIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI JAGADISH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3680/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 State Bank of India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Financial Reporting & Taxation Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Dept. Mumbai 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 [PAN: AAACS8577K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3882/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. State Bank of India of Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Financial Reporting & Taxation Mumbai Dept. 3rd Floor, Corpor…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI JAGADISH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3680/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 State Bank of India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Financial Reporting & Taxation Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Dept. Mumbai 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 [PAN: AAACS8577K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3882/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. State Bank of India of Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Financial Reporting & Taxation Mumbai Dept. 3rd Floor, Corpor…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. RALLIS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7855/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…ase CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 6 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. ITR 505 and decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1. The couple of decisions relied upon by the A.O. have subsequently been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court. In so far as disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is concerned, we have already discussed the methodology adopted by the assessee to make the suo-motu disallowance. Suffice to say, assessee is following this method consistently over the years.…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. RALLIS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7854/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…ase CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 6 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. ITR 505 and decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1. The couple of decisions relied upon by the A.O. have subsequently been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court. In so far as disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is concerned, we have already discussed the methodology adopted by the assessee to make the suo-motu disallowance. Suffice to say, assessee is following this method consistently over the years.…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. RALLIS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7853/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…ase CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 6 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. ITR 505 and decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1. The couple of decisions relied upon by the A.O. have subsequently been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court. In so far as disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is concerned, we have already discussed the methodology adopted by the assessee to make the suo-motu disallowance. Suffice to say, assessee is following this method consistently over the years.…

ACIT- 8(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. RALLIS INDIA LIMITED, MUMBAI

06/Mum/2026

ITA 7852/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.AR
Section 14A

…ase CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014] 366 6 ITA Nos.7852 to 7855/Mum/2025 & CO Nos.06 to 09/Mum/2026 (A.Ys. 2013-14, 14-15, 16-17 & 17-18) Raillis India Ltd. ITR 505 and decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1. The couple of decisions relied upon by the A.O. have subsequently been reversed by the Hon'ble High Court. In so far as disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is concerned, we have already discussed the methodology adopted by the assessee to make the suo-motu disallowance. Suffice to say, assessee is following this method consistently over the years.…

M/S. BANK OF AMERICAN , N.A,MUMBAI vs. THE JT DIT (I.T)3, MUMBAI

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

ITA 4154/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2026AY 2000-2001
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 44C

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“I” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No.4090/MUM/2004\n(Assessment Year: 2000-01)\nDeputy Director of Income Tax\n(International Taxation)-1(1),\nRoom No.117, Scindia House,\nN.M. Road, Ballard Pier,\nMumbai - 400001\nAppellant\nv/s\nM/s. Bank of America N.A,\nP.O. Box No.11506\nExpress Towers\nNariman Point\nMumbai - 400021\nPAN : AAACB1537G\nRespondent\nITA No.4154/MUM/2004\n(Assessment Year: 2000-01)\nM/s. Bank of America N.A,\nGround Floor, A Wing, One BKC,\nG Block, Bandra K…

THE DY DIT (I.T) 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BANK OF AMERICA N.A., MUMBAI

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

ITA 4090/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2026AY 2000-2001
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 44C

…{ "clean_text": "IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\n“I” BENCH, MUMBAI\nBEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER\nITA No.4090/MUM/2004\n(Assessment Year: 2000-01)\nDeputy Director of Income Tax\n(International Taxation)-1(1),\nRoom No.117, Scindia House,\nN.M. Road, Ballard Pier,\nMumbai - 400001\nAppellant\nv/s\nM/s. Bank of America N.A,\nP.O. Box No.11506\nExpress Towers\nNariman Point\nMumbai - 400021\nPAN: AAACB1537G\nRespondent\nITA No.4154/MUM/2004\n(Assessment Year: 2000-01)\nM/s. Bank of America N.A,\nGround Floor, A Wing, One BKC,\nG Block, Bandra Ku…

THE DAKSHIN DINAJPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,BALURGHAT vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3,, MALDA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2187/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Chatterjee, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Archana Gupta, DR
Section 36(1)(viia)

…the case of Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. Vs CIT (2012)343 ITR 270(SC). We note that the decision relied by the ld. AO in case of Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, Coimbatore [2010] 187 Taxman 346 (SC)/[2010] 320 ITR 577 (SC)/[2010] 228 CTR 440 (SC)[11-01-2010] ITA Nos. 2187 to 2189/KOL/2025 The Dakshin Dinajpur District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. AYs 2012-13 to 2014-15 is not applicable to the assessee as the decision was rendered in the context of Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act, where the assessee is a co- operative bank and therefore, the Section 36(1)(viia) is appliable for rural…

RITURAJ STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,BILASPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), BILASPUR

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

ITA 697/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 697/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rituraj Steel Private Limited, M/S Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Rituraj Steel Private Limited, Hotel Tax, Circle 2(1), Bilaspur, East Park Agrasen Chowk, Shri Ram Plaza Vapar Vihar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, 495001 Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, 495001 Pan: Aaccr7589J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से / Assessee By : None (Petition Filed) राज" की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 05/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of : 09/02/2026 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am: This Appeal For Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2017-18 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29.10.2025 Of The Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mysore [‘Addl. Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

For Appellant: None (Petition filed)For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर "ायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी पाथ" सारथी चौधरी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी अवधेश कुमार िम", लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No: 697/RPR/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rituraj Steel Private Limited, M/s Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Rituraj Steel Private Limited, Hotel Tax, Circle 2(1), Bilaspur, East Park Agrasen Chowk, Shri Ram Plaza Vapar Vihar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, 495001 Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, 495001 PAN: AACCR7589J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" /…

MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2552/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Madhao VichoreFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Limited Plot No.C-19, Prakashganga, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra. [PAN:AAECM2936N] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer Circle 14(1)(1), Vs Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. …………. Respondent (ITA No.2093/Mum/2025) (Assessment Year:2016-2017) Income Tax Officer Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. …………. Appellant Vs Maharashtra State…

JCIT(OSD)-14(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION CO. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2093/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Madhao VichoreFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Limited Plot No.C-19, Prakashganga, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra. [PAN:AAECM2936N] …………. Appellant Income Tax Officer Circle 14(1)(1), Vs Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. …………. Respondent (ITA No.2093/Mum/2025) (Assessment Year:2016-2017) Income Tax Officer Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. …………. Appellant Vs Maharashtra State…

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

ITA 1548/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1451/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Bank of India, 8th Floor, Taxation Department, Star House, C-5, G-Block, Bandra – Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) Mumbai – 400051 PAN: AAACB0472C v/s Appellant Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400020 Respondent ITA No.1547/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai - 400020 Bank…

ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 1547/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1452/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Bank of India, 8th Floor, Taxation Department, Star House, C-5, G-Block, Bandra – Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400051 PAN: AAACB0472C v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai – 400020 ITA No.1548/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. THE NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, MUMBAI

ITA 1452/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 90

…ified hereinabove." 7. The judgment of the Punjab and Haryana Court in the case of State Bank of Patiala (supra) was also cited with approval by the Supreme Court in a subsequent judgment South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT [2021] 130 taxmann.com 178/283 Taxman 178/438 ITR 1 and held as under:- "25. ...The Punjab and Haryana High Court, in the case of Pr CIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017) 88 taxmann.com 667/393 ITR 476 (Puni. & Har.) while adverting to the CBDT Circular, concluded correctly that shares and securities held by a bank are stock-in-trade, and all income received on such shares and securities must be consi…

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2018-

ITA 1451/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailita No.1452/Mum/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10Section 14ASection 250Section 32Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1452/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Bank of India, 8th Floor, Taxation Department, Star House, C-5, G-Block, Bandra – Kurla Complex, Bandra (East) ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400051 PAN: AAACB0472C v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – 2(1)(2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai – 400020 ITA No.1548/MUM/2023 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE vs. VASCON ENGINEERS LIMITED, PUNE

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is Dismissed

ITA 1105/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1105/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Vs. Vascon Engineers Limited, Of Income Tax, Pune. Vascon Weikfileld Chamber, Opposite Hyatt Hotel, Nagar Road, Pune – 411014. Pan: Aaacv1249F Appellant/ Revenue Respondent /Assessee Assessee By Shri Ajit Tolani & Darpan Kriplani Revenue By Smt. Indira R. Adakil – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 27/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 05.02.2025Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C(3/4) Of The Act, 1961 Dated 23.01.2017 For The A.Y.2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 36(1)(u)

…income. Ld.CIT(A) has followed the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd 383 ITR 529 and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd . 4 ITA No.1105/PUN/2025 [D] 2.4 Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT [2021] 438 ITR 1(SC)[09-09-2021] has held as under : Quote, “27. The aforesaid discussion and the cited judgments advise this Court to conclude that the proportionate disallowance of interest is not warranted, under section 14A of Income Tax Act for investments made in tax-free bonds/securities which yield tax-free dividend and interest to Assessee Banks in those s…

BALKRISHNA RATHI FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2328/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFOREDR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.2328/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Balkrishna Rathi Finance V The Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, s Pune. Gat No.126, 127 & 136, Amralewadi Ambadvet Taluka Mulshi, Belawade Mulshi, Pune – 412108. Maharashtra. PAN: AAACB7443H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue by Shri Ambarnath Khule-JCIT(Through Virtual Hearing) Date of hearing 2…

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 2037/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…ficient own funds for making the investments and therefore no disallowance of interest under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules can be made. In this regard reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2021] 438 ITR 1 (SC). The Ld. CIT(A), following the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Rasoi Ltd., passed in ITA No. 109 of 2016 dated February 15, 2017, has held that the Ld. AO was not justified in disallowing interest of ₹89,02,300/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and directed the same to be deleted. The CIT(A) following the decision of this Hon'ble B…

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

…ficient own funds for making the investments and therefore no disallowance of interest under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules can be made. In this regard reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2021] 438 ITR 1 (SC). The Ld. CIT(A), following the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Rasoi Ltd., passed in ITA No. 109 of 2016 dated February 15, 2017, has held that the Ld. AO was not justified in disallowing interest of ₹89,02,300/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and directed the same to be deleted. The CIT(A) following the decision of this Hon'ble B…

Showing 1–20 of 497 · Page 1 of 25

...