← All Phrases

“Section 36(1)(iii)”

Section References (mined)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)1,547 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 36(1)(iii) is CIT v. Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (313 ITR 340), cited in 2,118 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iii)

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.

S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT
288 ITR 1 · 2007 · Supreme Court
1,484
citing judgments

Interest paid on borrowed funds cannot be disallowed merely because the assessee made interest-free advances, provided those advances were made for business purposes and commercial expediency. The Revenue cannot dictate a businessman's commercial decisions, but the assessee bears the onus to prove the business expediency.

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.

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT
347 ITR 272 · 2012 · High Court
516
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned. The Assessing Officer must record satisfaction regarding the assessee's accounts before making any disallowance.

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.

Judgments citing Section 36(1)(iii)

Deep Energy Resources Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1129/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1129/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17) बनाम/ Deep Energy Resources Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd. Income-Tax Vs. [Formerly Deep Circle – 1(1)(2), Ahmedabad Industries Ltd.] 12A & 14, Abhishree Corporate Park, Near Shell Petrol Pump, Ambli Bopal Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380058 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacd6915E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Sakar Sharma, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01/01/2025 10/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43A

forward cover was to be treated as capital in nature. In this regard, the Ld. AR has drawn our attention to provision of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) and submitted that the interest paid in respect of capital borrowed ... nature of revenue expenditure. We do not find any merit in the arguments of the Ld. CIT(A). The provision of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act categorically stipulates that the interest paid in respect of borrowed capital for the purpose of business is an allowable deduction. Only

Rahul Berry, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 451/CHANDI/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.451/Chd/2016 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :2008-09 Rahul Berry, Vs. The Acit, Prop. Berry Cotton Industries, बनाम Circle Ii, B-Xiii-1661,Karimpaura Ludhiana Chowk, Ludhiana "थायीलेखासं./Pan No:Abkpb0070A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Sh. S.K Mukhi, Advocate राज"वक"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.10.2024 उदघोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.12.2024 आदेश/Order Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M.:

For Appellant: Sh. S.K Mukhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Ranjit Kaur, Addl CIT, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

submitted before the lower authorities. It was accordingly submitted that there was no basis for disallowance of proportionate interest invoking the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. 8. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the findings of the lower authorities. 9. We have heard the rival ... reflected at the year end. In light of the same, we find that there is no basis to invoke the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act and the addition so made and sustained by the ld CIT(A) is hereby set-aside. The ground of appeals