South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT

438 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2021#132 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.

508

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 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)
Read the full judgment

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

Idfc First Bank Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Range Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

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

ITA 221/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…l, the assessee has taken this plea vide ground no.1.1.1 as reproduced above. 5. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd Vs.CITreported in (2021)438 ITR 1 (SC), wherein it is held that shares and securities held by the bank are stock in trade and all income received on such shares and securities must be considered as business income and this is why section 14A of the Act would not get attracted to such income. The learned counsel for the assessee stated that the issue of exclusion of securities hel…

Pragati Power Corporation Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 1617/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 145(2)Section 32Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43ASection 46ASection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER Pragati Power Asst. CIT Corporation Ltd. Circle-20(1) Himadri Rajghat Power Vs. New Delhi House, Office Complex Rajghat New Delhi-110002 PAN:AACCP 8035F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv., Shri S. Krishnan, Adv. & Shri Shaurya Jain, CA Respondent by Ms. Nimisha Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 20/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement 14/08/2024 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM: 1. This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the o…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 399/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 397/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 396/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 395/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 394/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 393/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…t of such mixed funds, the investment that yield tax free investments should be presumed to have been made out of interest free funds only. Reference in this regard was made to decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank and other Banks 130 Taxmann.com 178 (SC) and UTI bank Ltd. 142 Taxmann.com 136(SC). (iii) It was submitted that the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of PCIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218 where exempt income in the form of dividend was earned by the Bank from securities held by it as its stock in trade, held that the assessee was engaged in the…

ACIT, Sambalpur vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 219/CTK/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.219/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) Acit, Sambalpur Vs Smt. Indrani Patnaik, A-6, Comercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela Pan No. :Accpp 6164 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/08/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 29.03.2023, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.Bhubaneswar-2/10625/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2019-2020, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made Towards Peripheral Development Charges Of Rs. 49,49,231/- As Such Expenditure Is Not Allowable As Per The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The Act. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,69,56,849/- U/S 14A As The Assessee Has Exempt Income During The Year. 3. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A Holding That Satisfaction Is Not Recorded By The Ao, When The Assessee Has Not Suomoto Disallowed Any Expenditure Related To Earning Exempt Income As Decided By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Maxopp Investment Ltd Dtd 12.02.2018. 4. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A, When The Ao Has Given A Finding In The Assessment Order That The Assessee Has Shown Investment That Yielded Tax Free

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 135Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 37Section 37(1)

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.219/CTK/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) ACIT, Sambalpur Vs Smt. Indrani Patnaik, A-6, Comercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela PAN No. :ACCPP 6164 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri S.C.Bhadra, CA सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 06/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/08/…

Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangaluru

ITA 562/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 115TSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(vii)

…by the AO as held in the MAK Data (P) Ltd Vs CIT[2013](358 1 TR 593) (SC). Thus, the assessee's contention on this count was rejected by ld. CIT(A). 6.4 The assessee had further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) has held that no disallowance can be made in case of bank because the Page 6 of 20 investment made by a banking concern is part of their banking business and income from such investment shall be business income. On examination of the aforesaid decision, it is seen that the Hon'ble Court had referred the CBDT's Circular No. 18 of 2015 wherein t…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Mangalore vs. The Karnataka Bank Limited, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 555/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Sri S. Ananthan & Smt. Lalitha RameswaranFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 115TSection 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(vii)

…by the AO as held in the MAK Data (P) Ltd Vs CIT[2013](358 1 TR 593) (SC). Thus, the assessee's contention on this count was rejected by ld. CIT(A). 6.4 The assessee had further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) has held that no disallowance can be made in case of bank because the ITA Nos.555 & 562/Bang/2024 The Karnataka Bank Limited, Mangalore Page 6 of 20 investment made by a banking concern is part of their banking business and income from such investment shall be business income. On examination of the aforesaid decision, it is seen that the Hon'b…

Mahadev Enclave Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. PCIT(Central), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 636/JPR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Dhaka (CIT)
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 636/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 cuke Mahadev Enclave Private PCIT Vs. Limited, (Central), Jaipur B 37 Ayodhya Marg, Hanuman Nagar, Khatipura, S.O., Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM 9213 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA jktLo dh…

Allcargo Gati Limited(Formally Known As Gati Limited), Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-2(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1686/HYD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2009-10 All Cargo Gati Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Hyderabad. (Formerly Known As Gati Limited), Mumbai. Pan : Aabcg3709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate Revenue By: Ms. K. Haritha, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.06.2024 01.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” , HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 All Cargo Gati Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Hyderabad. (Formerly known as Gati limited), Mumbai. PAN : AABCG3709Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate Revenue by: Ms. K. Haritha, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 27.06.2024 01.07.2024 Date of pronouncement: O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee, feeling aggrieve…

Tata International Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

ITA 2232/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Dhivya Ruth J., Ld. DR
Section 14Section 144CSection 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 57

…then it should be presumed that the investments are made from the Own Funds and not from Borrowings, consequently disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act in respect of interest expenditure ought to be deleted. (i) South Indian Bank Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 438 ITR 1 (SC) (09-09-2021) (Para 27 Page 51) (Page 45 to 51) (ii) CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (Page 52 to 55) (iii) HDFC Bank Ltd vs. DCIT 383 ITR 529 (Bom. HC) (Page 56 to 68) 8. Alternatively and without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that interest expense of Rs. 1144.02 Lakhs includes interest aggregating to R…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3031/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3030/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

DCIT-19(3), Mumbai vs. Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2012-

ITA 3004/MUM/2023[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash BohraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh
Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3031/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) ITA no.3004/Mum./2023 ITA no.3030/Mum./2023 (Assessment Year : 2013-14) (Assessment Year : 2014-15) DCIT-19(3) Room No. 513, Fifth Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, ……………. Appellant Parel, Maharashtra-400012 v/s Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya 150, Mumba devi Road, ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400002 PAN- AABPS5177K Assessee by :Shri Vimal Punmiya/Prakash Bohra Shri Ketan Jain Revenue by :Shri Manoj Kumar Singh Date o…

ACIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bofa Securities India Limited (Earlier Known As Dsp Merrill Lynch Ltd ), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6175/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…est expenses. As noted above, assessee’s own surplus funds were far more than investment made and therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 438 ITR 221, wherein it has been held that in case there are mixed funds available with the assessee i.e. owned funds as well as owed funds, the investments made by the assessee ought to be considered to be made out of the interest-free funds and the assessee has the right of appropriation of the funds, where 'sufficient interest-free funds are available. Th…

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bofa Securities India Limited (Earlier Known As M/S Dsp Merrill Lynch Limited ), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5425/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)

…est expenses. As noted above, assessee’s own surplus funds were far more than investment made and therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 438 ITR 221, wherein it has been held that in case there are mixed funds available with the assessee i.e. owned funds as well as owed funds, the investments made by the assessee ought to be considered to be made out of the interest-free funds and the assessee has the right of appropriation of the funds, where 'sufficient interest-free funds are available. Th…

Bofa Securities India Limited (Formerly Known As Dsp Merill Lynch Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5416/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jun 2024AY 2002-03
Section 143(3)

…est expenses. As noted above, assessee’s own surplus funds were far more than investment made and therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 438 ITR 221, wherein it has been held that in case there are mixed funds available with the assessee i.e. owned funds as well as owed funds, the investments made by the assessee ought to be considered to be made out of the interest-free funds and the assessee has the right of appropriation of the funds, where 'sufficient interest-free funds are available. Th…