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.

How many judgments cite South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT?

508 judgments on BharatTax cite South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (438 ITR 1), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 8D, Section 153A, Section 36(1)(viia).

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (438 ITR 1)

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mighty Construction P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3711/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Section 36(1)(iii)

…nt own funds to make the investment which were to the extent of 53.61 Crores as against value of investment of Rs.33.5 Crores. This issue now stands covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 438 ITR 1(SC). Accordingly, the action of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the said disallowance is upheld. Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed. 25. In so far as appeal for A.Y.2013-14 is concerned, again the most of the issues are similar. With regard to ground No.1(a) to 1(c) in respect of suppressed sales, we have already dealt this i…

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mighty Construction P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals raised by the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3042/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 36(1)(iii)

…nt own funds to make the investment which were to the extent of 53.61 Crores as against value of investment of Rs.33.5 Crores. This issue now stands covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 438 ITR 1(SC). Accordingly, the action of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the said disallowance is upheld. Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is also dismissed. 25. In so far as appeal for A.Y.2013-14 is concerned, again the most of the issues are similar. With regard to ground No.1(a) to 1(c) in respect of suppressed sales, we have already dealt this i…

Puspak Steel Industries Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-10, Pune

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

ITA 852/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sarvesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.852/PUN/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Puspak Steel Industries Vs. ACIT, Circle-10, Pune. Private Limited, Gat No.119, Alandi Markal Road, Village- Dhanore, Pune- 412105. PAN : AABCP0081C Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date of hearing : 10.08.2023 Date of pronouncement : 22.08.2023 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directe…

Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2525/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Section 14ASection 254(2)Section 438Section 43B

…AO to decide this issue afresh even though assessee might have suo- moto offered disallowance which now has been claimed that no disallowance should be made in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd reported in 438 ITR 1 (SC), wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that assessee has surplus funds and no disallowance of interest can be made. 5. Since similar issue in the order of ITA No.4220/Mum/2015 has been recalled for adjudicating the disallowance of interest cost of Rs.59.66 Crores u/s.14A0., therefore, our finding given in the appeal of ITA No.4220/Mum/2015 s…

Career Point Limited, Kota, Rajasthan vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Udaipur, Rajasthan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik (CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…rchase of this UTI TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS FUND and other investments which may generate exempt income. Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - (i) Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South India Bank Ltd v/s Commissioner of Income Tax [2021] 438 ITR 1 (SC)(Copy at PB page 140-145)wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Para 17 and 18 held as under: ““17. In a situation where the assessee has mixed fund (made up partly of interest free funds and partly of interest-bearing funds) and payment is made out of that mixed fund, the investment must be considered to have been made out of the interest free…

M/S C&S Electric Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi

The Appeals are allowed

ITA 3381/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 10ASection 10BSection 801CSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2033/Del/2014, A.Y.2009-10 ITA No. 6178/Del/2014, A.Y.2010-11 ITA No. 3381/Del/2016, A.Y.2011-12 M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (Formerly known as Controls & LTU, New Delhi Switchgear Co. Ltd.) 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Phase-III, New Delhi- 110020 PAN : AAACC0909K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Anil Bhalla, CA Revenue by Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sh…

M/S. C & S Electric Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The Appeals are allowed

ITA 6178/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 10ASection 10BSection 801CSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2033/Del/2014, A.Y.2009-10 ITA No. 6178/Del/2014, A.Y.2010-11 ITA No. 3381/Del/2016, A.Y.2011-12 M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (Formerly known as Controls & LTU, New Delhi Switchgear Co. Ltd.) 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Phase-III, New Delhi- 110020 PAN : AAACC0909K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Anil Bhalla, CA Revenue by Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sh…

M/S. C & S Electric Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The Appeals are allowed

ITA 2033/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Aug 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 10ASection 10BSection 801CSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2033/Del/2014, A.Y.2009-10 ITA No. 6178/Del/2014, A.Y.2010-11 ITA No. 3381/Del/2016, A.Y.2011-12 M/s. C & S Electric Ltd. Vs. ACIT, (Formerly known as Controls & LTU, New Delhi Switchgear Co. Ltd.) 222, Okhla Industrial Estate Phase-III, New Delhi- 110020 PAN : AAACC0909K Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Anil Bhalla, CA Revenue by Sh. Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 19.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 21.08.2023 ORDER Per Anubhav Sh…

ACIT, Cir.-29, Kolkata vs. M/S Steel Authority of India Employees Co-Op. Cr. Society Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 268/KOL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma] I.T.A. No. 268/Kol/2023 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Acit, Circle-29, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Steel Authority Of India Employees Co-Operative Credit Society Limited Pan: Aadas 9699 B Appellant Respondent Date Of Hearing 15.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09.08.2023 For The Assessee Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Mrs. Puja Somani, Ca For The Revenue Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit, Dr Order Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 20.12.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)(ii)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…-operative Bank Ltd (289 ITR 6). 14. We note that this particular proposition laid down in the above judgment (supra), was reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in their decision rendered in the case of another banking company, South Indian Bank Ltd Vs CIT (438 ITR 1) also rendered of a banking company. The Hon’ble Supreme Court took note of the Board’s Circular No. 18 dated 02.11.2015 issued in the context of cooperative societies & banking companies, and their earlier judgment in the case of CIT Vs Nawanshahar Central Co-operative Bank Ltd (supra), and it held that the income arising from trading in securitie…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle)-1, Raipur vs. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 96/RPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur01 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 96/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…at no disallowance u/s.14A can be made in respect of interest paid on borrowings if assessee’s own funds and non- interest-bearing funds exceeds investments in tax free securities had relied on the following decisions: (i) South India Bank Ltd. Vs. CIT (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) (ii) HDFC Bank Vs. DCIT (2016) 383 ITR 529 (Bom.) 6 ACIT, CC-1, Raipur (C.G.) Vs. M/s. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited 10. After having given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions advanced by the Ld. Authorized Representative of both the parties, we find substantial force in the claim of the Ld. AR that now when the assessee compan…