Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT

134 ITR 219High Court1982#795 most cited

What is Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Where an assessee's own funds or interest-free funds exceed the interest-free advances or investments made, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made, including under Section 14A.

129

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT · 134 ITR 219 · Section 36(1)(iii) · Section 14A · disallowance of interest · interest expenditure · own funds · interest-free funds · investments · surplus funds · presumption of own funds · East India Pharmaceutical approval

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Woolcombers of India Ltd. v. CIT

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…ot out of own funds. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following decisions: 51 | P a g e State Bank of India ITA Nos.3644&4563/Mum/2016  CIT vs. Reliance Utilities & Power Limited [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bombay)  Woolcombers of India Ltd. vs. CIT [1982] 134 ITR 219 (Calcutta)  Reckitt & Coleman of India vs. CIT [1982] 135 ITR 698 (Calcutta)  India Explosives Ltd. vs. CIT [1984] 147 ITR 392 (Calcutta)  Alkali & Chemical Corporation of India Ltd. vs. [1986] 161 ITR 820 (Calcutta)  British Paints (India) Ltd. vs. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 196 (Calcutta)  Consolidated Investments Ltd. vs. DCIT [1996] 57 ITD 286 (…

Nik-San Engineering Co. Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle - 2(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2787/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed1. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2786/Ahd/2017 2. आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2787/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Res Pe Ctiv Ely) 1-2. Nik-San Engineering 1-2. The Dcit बनाम/ Co.Ltd. Cicle-2(1)(1) Vs. 201, 204, Vikas Chambers Aayakar Bhavan Jn. Of Link & Marve Road Baroda Malad West, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcn 8963 D .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Written Submission ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Written submissionFor Respondent: Shri L.P. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)

…ds as also interest free funds, discretion lies in the hands of the assessee for utilization of those funds. Reliance for that purpose is placed on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Woolcombers of India Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax 134 ITR 219. It was further submitted that the view taken by the Calcultta High Court had found approval by the Supreme Court in East India Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax 224 ITR 627 (S.C.).” ITA Nos.2786 & 2787/Ahd/2017 Nik-san Engineering Co.Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Years – 2013-14 & 2014-15 5. The Ld. Assessing Officer was not agree…

M/S. Hella India Lighting Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 1109/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2010-11 Hella India Lighting Ltd., Vs Dcit, B-13, Badarpur Extension, Circle-11(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacj0101G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate & Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sanjay I Bara, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.05.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.07.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23Rd December, 2014 Passed By The Dcit, Circle 11(1), New Delhi U/S 143(3) Read With Section 144C Of The It Act, 1961 For Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Of The Case, In Brief, Are That The Assessee Is A Company Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing Of Automobile Components Including Head Lamps, Tail Lamps, Horns Switches, Bulbs, Sundry Lamps, Wiper Arms & Wiper Blades. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 5Th October, 2010 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.1,46,71,148/-. Since The Assessee Has Undertaken International Transactions With Its Ae, The Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 40a

…ied. He also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Givo Ltd. and various other decisions filed in the case law compilation. He also relied on the following decisions:- i) 192 ITR 165 (Kar.); ii) 295 CTR 448 (P&H); iii) 134 ITR 219 (Cal); and iv) 135 ITR 698. 26. The ld. DR, on the other hand, strongly relied on the order of the A.O./TPO/DRP. 18 27. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the orders of the A.O. and DRP. We find the Assessing Officer, in the instant case, invoking the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) and Explanation 8 to…