← All Phrases

“disallowance of interest expenditure”

DisallowancesSection 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(iii)785 judgments

The decision most relied on for disallowance of interest expenditure is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on disallowance of interest expenditure

CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd.
313 ITR 340 · 2009 · High Court
2,118
citing judgments

Where an assessee claims that investments were made out of own funds, interest disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D may not apply if the assessee demonstrates the availability of sufficient interest-free funds to cover such investments.

CIT v. HDFC Bank Ltd.
366 ITR 505 · 2014 · High Court
1,261
citing judgments

When an assessee possesses interest-free funds sufficient to cover investments yielding tax-free income, it is presumed that such investments were made from these interest-free funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT
328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court
1,183
citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
438 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
508
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
410 ITR 466 · 2019 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

When mixed funds are available, interest-free advances are presumed to be made from the assessee's own interest-free funds, preventing disallowance of interest expenditure under section 36(1)(iii). This principle also applies to section 14A disallowance, where interest expenditure is not disallowed if surplus funds are available and no direct nexus is established with borrowed funds for investments earning exempt income.

CIT v. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd.
254 ITR 377 · 2002 · High Court
417
citing judgments

When there is a nexus between an expenditure and the purpose of business, incurred on grounds of commercial expediency, the Revenue cannot question its reasonableness or assume the role of the businessman to compel profit maximization. This principle applies even if the business is not that of the assessee itself.

HDFC Bank Ltd. v. DCIT
383 ITR 529 · 2016 · High Court
408
citing judgments

Where an assessee has sufficient interest-free funds, investments yielding exempt income are presumed to be made out of such funds, precluding disallowance of related interest expenditure under section 14A.

Hero Cycles Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT
379 ITR 347 · 2015 · Supreme Court
361
citing judgments

The Revenue cannot substitute its judgment for that of a businessman regarding the necessity or reasonableness of an expenditure. If an expense is incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes, it is deductible, and the Revenue cannot question its commercial expediency.

Judgments citing disallowance of interest expenditure

Rswm Ltd, Bhilwara vs. DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 144/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. Naagar, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 14A

have heard rival submissions and perused materials on record. It is the say of learned counsel for the assessee before us that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) can be made, as the assessee had sufficient interest free fund available by way of reserves and surplus ... available with it by way of share capital, reserves and surplus. That being the factual position emerging on record, we hold that no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made under rule 8D(2)(ii). Hence, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance made under Rule

Rswm Ltd, Bhilwara vs. DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 143/DEL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. Naagar, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 14A

have heard rival submissions and perused materials on record. It is the say of learned counsel for the assessee before us that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) can be made, as the assessee had sufficient interest free fund available by way of reserves and surplus ... available with it by way of share capital, reserves and surplus. That being the factual position emerging on record, we hold that no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made under rule 8D(2)(ii). Hence, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance made under Rule

Rswm Ltd, Bhilwara vs. DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi

In the result, appeals are partly allowed

ITA 142/DEL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. S.S. Naagar, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Ramdhan Meena, Sr. DR
Section 14A

have heard rival submissions and perused materials on record. It is the say of learned counsel for the assessee before us that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) can be made, as the assessee had sufficient interest free fund available by way of reserves and surplus ... available with it by way of share capital, reserves and surplus. That being the factual position emerging on record, we hold that no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made under rule 8D(2)(ii). Hence, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance made under Rule

Icici Bank Limited, Mumbai vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax 2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result both appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed

ITA 158/MUM/2023[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit Cir 3(1) Vs. Icici Bank Ltd. Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, Icici Towers, Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact1398K Appellant .. Respondent Icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Dcit Cir. 2(3)(1) Icici Towers, North East Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Wing, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bkc, Bandra(E) Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact1398K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Aarti Visanji, Ar Respondent By : Shri. K.C. Selvamani, Dr Date Of Hearing 01.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement .06.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri. K.C. Selvamani, DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 33Section 47

held as under: "27. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The main contention of the assessee against disallowance of interest expenditure is, investment in dividend earning assets were made out of surplus interest free funds available with the assessee. We find substantial merit ... interest free funds are available with the assessee to take care of the investments made in shares giving rise to dividend income, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra

The DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result both appeals of the assessee and revenue are dismissed

ITA 5765/MUM/2008[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2023AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit Cir 3(1) Vs. Icici Bank Ltd. Room No. 607, 6 Th Floor, Icici Towers, Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact1398K Appellant .. Respondent Icici Bank Ltd. Vs. Dcit Cir. 2(3)(1) Icici Towers, North East Room No. 552, 5Th Floor, Wing, Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bkc, Bandra(E) Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaact1398K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms. Aarti Visanji, Ar Respondent By : Shri. K.C. Selvamani, Dr Date Of Hearing 01.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement .06.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am)

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, ARFor Respondent: Shri. K.C. Selvamani, DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 33Section 47

held as under: "27. We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The main contention of the assessee against disallowance of interest expenditure is, investment in dividend earning assets were made out of surplus interest free funds available with the assessee. We find substantial merit ... interest free funds are available with the assessee to take care of the investments made in shares giving rise to dividend income, no disallowance of interest expenditure can be made in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra

DCIT, CC-6(4), Mumbai vs. Archana Ajay Mittal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1032/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanthe Dcit, Cc-6(4) Archana Ajay Mittal Room No. 1925, 19Th 302, Level-3, Ceejay बनाम/ Floor Air India Bldg, House, Anne Besant Vs. Nariman Point, Road, Worli, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6545C (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kavita Kaushik.DRFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 57

assessee has not earned any exempt income and therefore the provisions of Sec. 14A r.w.s 8D cannot be invoked. In respect of disallowance of interest expenditure u/sec57 of the Act, the grievance of the revenue that the assessee has paid higher rate of interest to the Lenders and has received

DCIT C.C. 8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2302/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

flats is chargeable to tax under the head ‗Profits and Gains of Business or Profession‘ or under the head ‗Capital Gains‘; (ii) Disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) for A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17; (iii) Additions made under section 153A of the Act for ‗unabated years ... treating the proceeds from sale of flats as income under the head ‗Profits and Gains from Business and Profession‘ and disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) was not based on any ‗incriminating material‘ seized during the course of search proceedings. This is evident from the fact that there

DCIT CC 8(4) ., Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2301/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

flats is chargeable to tax under the head ‗Profits and Gains of Business or Profession‘ or under the head ‗Capital Gains‘; (ii) Disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) for A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17; (iii) Additions made under section 153A of the Act for ‗unabated years ... treating the proceeds from sale of flats as income under the head ‗Profits and Gains from Business and Profession‘ and disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) was not based on any ‗incriminating material‘ seized during the course of search proceedings. This is evident from the fact that there

DCIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2300/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

flats is chargeable to tax under the head ‗Profits and Gains of Business or Profession‘ or under the head ‗Capital Gains‘; (ii) Disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) for A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17; (iii) Additions made under section 153A of the Act for ‗unabated years ... treating the proceeds from sale of flats as income under the head ‗Profits and Gains from Business and Profession‘ and disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) was not based on any ‗incriminating material‘ seized during the course of search proceedings. This is evident from the fact that there

Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir -8(4), Mumbai

ITA 2005/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

flats is chargeable to tax under the head ‗Profits and Gains of Business or Profession‘ or under the head ‗Capital Gains‘; (ii) Disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) for A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17; (iii) Additions made under section 153A of the Act for ‗unabated years ... treating the proceeds from sale of flats as income under the head ‗Profits and Gains from Business and Profession‘ and disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) was not based on any ‗incriminating material‘ seized during the course of search proceedings. This is evident from the fact that there

Aurum Platz Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir-8(40, Mumbai

ITA 2004/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sashi Tulsiyan, ARFor Respondent: Smt Shailja Rai, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 69C

flats is chargeable to tax under the head ‗Profits and Gains of Business or Profession‘ or under the head ‗Capital Gains‘; (ii) Disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) for A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17; (iii) Additions made under section 153A of the Act for ‗unabated years ... treating the proceeds from sale of flats as income under the head ‗Profits and Gains from Business and Profession‘ and disallowance of interest expenditure u/s 36(1)(iii) was not based on any ‗incriminating material‘ seized during the course of search proceedings. This is evident from the fact that there

Gujarat Salt Works, Gandhidham vs. The Pr. CIT-1, Rajkot

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7/RJT/2021[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot16 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)

Explanation 2 to Section 263(1) of the I.T. Act for the year under consideration. 4. That, the Learned Principal CIT has wrongly disallowed the interest expenditure on advances to associate or sister concern and failed to consider the principal of commercial expediency and the financial position of the assessee ... interest expenditure” incurred by the assessee during the impugned assessment. Therefore, it cannot be said in the instant set of facts that proportionate disallowance of interest expenditure was beyond the scope of the original assessment proceedings or 263 proceedings. Secondly, the DR submitted that Ld. PCIT has specifically observed

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 223/VIZ/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent ... r.w.s. 8D of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent was clarified that

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 222/VIZ/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent ... r.w.s. 8D of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent was clarified that

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 221/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent ... r.w.s. 8D of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent was clarified that

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 81/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent ... r.w.s. 8D of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent was clarified that

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 80/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

/Viz/2022 A.Y.2013-14 to 2017-18 M/s KPR Agrochem Ltd., East Godavari 1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent ... r.w.s. 8D of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.70,01,395/-, made u/s 14A r.w.s. 8D, without considering the CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein the legislative intent was clarified that

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central Circle-1), Raipur vs. M/S. Real Ispat & Power Ltd., Raipur

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

ITA 101/RPR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 101/Rpr/2021 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs M/S Real Ispat & Power Ltd. (Central Circle-01), Raipur Vrindavan, Opp. Holy Hearts Schools, Raipur (C.G) Pan No. : Aabcr 9986 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. : Shri G. S. Agarwal, Ca "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am : The Present Appeal Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-3, Bhopal Dated 01.09.2021 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. In This Appeal Of Revenue Following Grounds Were Raised. “1. Whether On The Facts & In Law Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 2,57,13,664/- Made By The Ao U/S 14A R.W.S 8D? 2. Any Other Ground May Be Pressed At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Respondent: None
Section 143(2)Section 14A

expenditure incurred for earning of tax free income. 8. Backed by our aforesaid observations, we are unable to persuade ourselves to sustain the disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.3,99,790/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s.14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 which ... sister concern which were yielding exempt dividend income out of its non-interest bearing funds and same was not disputed by revenue, no disallowance of interest expenditure under section 14A was to be made-Held, yes [Para 14] [in favour of assessee]”  DCIT vs. Godawari Power & Ispat

Carol Info Services Limited, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-15(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3234/MUM/2022[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Chetan Kacha, Sr. A.R

Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi] (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] qua the assessment year 2002-03 on the grounds inter-alia that :- “Disallowance of interest expenditure allegedly incurred on funds utilized for providing interest free loans and advances - INR 8,76,34,810/- (Tax effect

Thomas Cook (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 1 (3)92), Mumbai

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

ITA 7807/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Thomas Cook (India) Ltd., Dy. Cit-1(3)(2), A Wing, 11Th Floor, Marathon Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, Vs. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Lower Parel (East), Road, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaact 4050 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr : Date Of Hearing 30/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/05/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan VedFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

would mandatorily comes comes comes into into into play play play for for for estimating estimating estimating the the the proportionate prop prop disallowance of interest expenditure. The estimation disallowance of interest expenditure. The estimation disallowance of interest expenditure. The estimation formula prescribed in the statute was inserted in formula