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 366,470 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

D.C.I.T., Circle - 10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Berger Paints India Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1741/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-Tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2022 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: Both These Cross Appeals By The Revenue & Assessee Are Arising Out Of Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-22, Kolkata Vide Appeal No. 14/Cit(A)-22/14-15/16-17/Kol Dated 31.02.2018 Against The Order Of Dcit, Circle-10(1), Kolkata Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The Act), Dated 31.12.2016 For Ay 2014-15. 2. Before Us, Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate & Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Amol Kamat, Cit, Dr Represented The Revenue. Ld. Counsel For The Ita No. 2299/Kol/2019 By Assessee Berger Paints India Ltd. Ays 2014-15 Assessee Has Placed On Record, A Brief Note On The Submissions Made Along With Paper Books & Chart Substantiate The Claims Made By The Assessee In The Assessment Year Under Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate and Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kamat, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80ISection 8O

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “B”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-tax, Circle-10(1) Vs. 129, Park Street Kolkata Kolkata-17 (PAN: AABCB0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Assessment Year: 2014-15 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner of Vs. 129, Park Street Income-tax, Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate and Shri Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Advocate Revenue : Shri Amol Kama…

D.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Berger Paints India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 918/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “C”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (PAN: AABCB0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner of 129, Park Street Income-tax Vs. Kolkata-17 Circle-10(1) (PAN: AABCB0976E) Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri…

D.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Berger Paints India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are partly allowed and appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 917/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalita Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (Pan: Aabcb0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) &

For Appellant: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Dhawan Singh & Shri David Z
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 8OSection 92B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH “C”, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.917 & 918/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Berger Paints India Ltd. Income-tax Vs. 129, Park Street Circle-10(1) Kolkata-17 Kolkata (PAN: AABCB0976E) (Appellant) (Respondent) & ITA Nos.2294 & 2295/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Berger Paints India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner of 129, Park Street Income-tax Vs. Kolkata-17 Circle-10(1) (PAN: AABCB0976E) Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri…

Benny Impex (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-4(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 7398/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri D.P. Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R
Section 10(36)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.7398/DEL/2019 Assessment Years 2016-17 Benny Impex (P) Ltd., v. ACIT, B-209, Naraina Inds. Area, Circle-4(2), Phase-I, New Delhi. New Delhi. TAN/PAN: AAACB5411H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri D.P. Agarwal, Adv. Respondent by: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr.D.R Date of hearing: 28 06 2022 Date of pronouncement: 18 07 2022 O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, A.M.: The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Comm…

M/S Atlanta Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle- 9 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue‟s appeal (ITA No

ITA 7749/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Jha
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…funds are more than the investments, the presumption is that such investments would been made from the interest free funds. The aforesaid view stands approved by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax : 438 ITR 1 (SC). In view of the aforesaid, no disallowance is warranted in terms of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act. Assessment Year: 2016-17 8.9. as regards disallowance on INR 1,65,09,605/- made by the Assessing Officer in terms of Section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act, It has been contended by the Assessee that only inves…

Dy CIT 9 (1)(2), Mumbai vs. Atlanta Limited, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue‟s appeal (ITA No

ITA 7695/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Jha
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…funds are more than the investments, the presumption is that such investments would been made from the interest free funds. The aforesaid view stands approved by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax : 438 ITR 1 (SC). In view of the aforesaid, no disallowance is warranted in terms of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Act. Assessment Year: 2016-17 8.9. as regards disallowance on INR 1,65,09,605/- made by the Assessing Officer in terms of Section 14A read with Rule 8D(ii) of the Act, It has been contended by the Assessee that only inves…

Saregama India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1517/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 10Section 139(1)Section 14ASection 43B

…s and securities, therefore no disallowance is required to be made in respect of interest u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules. The case of the assessee also find support from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC). Accordingly we modify the order of Ld. CIT(A) by directing the AO delete the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) . The ground no. 2 is allowed. 10. The issue raised in ground no. 3 is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the order of AO wherein the AO has added disallowance made u/s 14A read with Rule 8D while calculating the…

M/S. Syngene International Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range- 6, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 147/BANG/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Sumer Singh Meena, DR
Section 10ASection 10BSection 14ASection 250Section 32(1)(iia)Section 80

…ITA No.147/Bang/2020 M/s. Syngene International Limited, Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Syngene International Limited Plot No.2&3, Bommasandra Industrial Area IV Phase, JCIT Special Range 6 Jigani Link Road Vs. Bangalore Bommasandra Bangalore 560 099. PAN NO : AABCS9936M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Sri Padamchand Khincha, A.R. Respondent by : Sri Sumer Singh Meena, DR Date of Hearing : 19.05.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 13.06.2022 O R D E R…

The Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Mangaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1907/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranthe Karnataka Bank Ltd. Dcit, Circle - 2(1) Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Mangalore Vs. Kankanady Mangalore 575002 Pan – Aabct5589K Appellant Respondent Dcit, Circle – 2(1) The Karnataka Bank Ltd. Mangalore Head Office, Mahaveera Circle Vs. Kankanady Mangalore 575002 Pan – Aabct5589K Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri S. Ananthan, Ca & Smt. Lalitha Rameswaran, Ca Revenue By: Shri Mudavathu Harish Chandra Naik, Ca Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.05.2022 O R D E R Per: B.R. Baskaran, A.M. These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27-03-2018 Passed By Ld Cit(A), Mangaluru & They Relate To The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Is A Banking Company Carrying On Banking Business. The Karnataka Bank Ltd.

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, CA &For Respondent: Shri Mudavathu Harish
Section 14A

…ble with the assessee. Hence this issue requires to be set aside to the file of AO for examining it afresh. 5.4 Before us, the Ld A.R also placed his reliance on the latest decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd (2021)(438 ITR 1)(SC), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has expressed following view:- “24. Another important judgment dealing with Section 14A disallowance which merits consideration is Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. V. DCIT [(2017) 7 SCC 421. Here the assessee had access to adequate interest free funds to make investments and the issue pertained to…

M/S. Chambal Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 744/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…sment years 2010/11 and 2011/12, there is no need to remand the matter to the CIT(A) to consider the correctness of the finding of the Assessing Officer that a disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) can be made. In the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) had to consider the issue as where interest free own funds available with the assessee exceeded the investments in tax free securities, could the investments be presumed to be made out of assessee’s own funds and, hence, a proportionate disallowance is not warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate accounts have not…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. ACIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 291/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…sment years 2010/11 and 2011/12, there is no need to remand the matter to the CIT(A) to consider the correctness of the finding of the Assessing Officer that a disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) can be made. In the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) had to consider the issue as where interest free own funds available with the assessee exceeded the investments in tax free securities, could the investments be presumed to be made out of assessee’s own funds and, hence, a proportionate disallowance is not warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate accounts have not…

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota vs. DCIT, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 201/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT)
Section 40A(2)(b)

…sment years 2010/11 and 2011/12, there is no need to remand the matter to the CIT(A) to consider the correctness of the finding of the Assessing Officer that a disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) can be made. In the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. (2021) 438 ITR 1 (SC) had to consider the issue as where interest free own funds available with the assessee exceeded the investments in tax free securities, could the investments be presumed to be made out of assessee’s own funds and, hence, a proportionate disallowance is not warranted under section 14A of the Act on the ground that separate accounts have not…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune vs. M/S. Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2428/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…mitted that the interest free funds are more than the investments made during the year and, therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made u/s 14A placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the disallowance under sub-rule (iii) of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules, the same was not pressed during the course of hearing before us. 12. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 13. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground of appeal relates…

Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2400/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…mitted that the interest free funds are more than the investments made during the year and, therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made u/s 14A placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the disallowance under sub-rule (iii) of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules, the same was not pressed during the course of hearing before us. 12. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 13. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground of appeal relates…

Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 6, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2641/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 143(3)

…mitted that the interest free funds are more than the investments made during the year and, therefore, no disallowance of interest can be made u/s 14A placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1 (SC). As regards the disallowance under sub-rule (iii) of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules, the same was not pressed during the course of hearing before us. 12. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR placed reliance on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 13. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground of appeal relates…

DCIT 13(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Wall Street Finance Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2175/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2Section 250Section 50Section 54E

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2175/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–13(3)(1), Mumbai v/s Wall Street Finance Ltd. 201–A, 2nd Floor, Chintamani Avenue CTS no.62–B, Off Western Express Highway ……………. Respondent Village Dindoshi, Opp. Virwani Industries Mumbai 400 063 PAN – AAACW1258P Assessee by : Shri Madhur Agrawal Revenue by : Shri Hoshang B. Irani Date of Hearing – 28.02.2022 Date of Order – 19/04/2022 O R D E R PER…

ACIT, Circle- 6(1), New Delhi vs. Clix Finance India Unlimited, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3260/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…st free of more than Rs.556.07 crores as against the exempt income earning investment of Rs.63.66 crores. Thus, interest expenditure could not have been disallowed. Now in the latest judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1, wherein it has been held that where assessee had interest free funds available which exceeds the investment made in tax free fund security then no interest expenditure can be disallowed and it has to be presumed that it is out of assessee’s own fund and proportionate disallowance could not warrant under section 14A even where no separate accounts…

Clix Finance India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-6(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2166/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, Adv.; &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…st free of more than Rs.556.07 crores as against the exempt income earning investment of Rs.63.66 crores. Thus, interest expenditure could not have been disallowed. Now in the latest judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank vs. CIT, 438 ITR 1, wherein it has been held that where assessee had interest free funds available which exceeds the investment made in tax free fund security then no interest expenditure can be disallowed and it has to be presumed that it is out of assessee’s own fund and proportionate disallowance could not warrant under section 14A even where no separate accounts…

Steel Authority of India Employees Co.-Op. Credit Society Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir.-28, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 425/KOL/2020[2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

…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…

ACIT, Cir.-29, Kolkata vs. Steel Authority of India Emp.Co.Op.Cr. Society Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 269/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

…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…