← 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)

Devraj Computers Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, It(OSD), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3274/CHNY/2018[2015-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2015-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3273 & 3274/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Devraj Computers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 42, Gee Gee Complex, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax, Corporate Range – 1, Mount Road, Chennai 600 002. Chennai. [Pan:Aabcd1593P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 27.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. In The Grounds Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Both The Assessment Years: Grounds Of Appeal 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Range-1, Chennai 34 Is Against The Facts Of The Case & Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -1 Made Arbitrary Additions Without The Right Application Of Law.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

balance has been given as interest free loans to parties and thus computed proportionate interest and disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), based on the cash flow statement from 2009-2015, has computed utilization of interest bearing funds for the purpose of giving ... interest bearing fund of ₹.1,63,99,101/- worked out by the ld. CIT(A) for the purpose of charging interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Thus, we modify the findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to reduce

Devraj Computers Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, It(OSD), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3273/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manjunatha, G.आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3273 & 3274/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S. Devraj Computers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 42, Gee Gee Complex, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax, Corporate Range – 1, Mount Road, Chennai 600 002. Chennai. [Pan:Aabcd1593P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 05.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.03.2024 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 27.09.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16. In The Grounds Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Following Common Grounds For Both The Assessment Years: Grounds Of Appeal 1. The Order Passed By The Learned Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Corporate Range-1, Chennai 34 Is Against The Facts Of The Case & Principles Of Natural Justice. 2. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -1 Made Arbitrary Additions Without The Right Application Of Law.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 40A(3)

balance has been given as interest free loans to parties and thus computed proportionate interest and disallowed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), based on the cash flow statement from 2009-2015, has computed utilization of interest bearing funds for the purpose of giving ... interest bearing fund of ₹.1,63,99,101/- worked out by the ld. CIT(A) for the purpose of charging interest under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Thus, we modify the findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the Assessing Officer to reduce