Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        ITAT allows appeal, finding no nexus between borrowed funds & share investment, reversing disallowance.

        M/s Vijay Industries Versus D.C.I.T., Circle-1, Alwar

        M/s Vijay Industries Versus D.C.I.T., Circle-1, Alwar - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Non-compliance with ITAT Jaipur's directive to establish the nexus between borrowed funds and investment in shares.
        2. Non-adherence to the Bombay High Court's ruling in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. regarding interest disallowance.
        3. Disallowance of interest under Section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Act.

        Detailed Analysis:

        Issue 1: Non-compliance with ITAT Jaipur's Directive
        The assessee argued that the Assessing Officer (AO) erred by not following the ITAT Jaipur's directive to establish the nexus between borrowed funds and investment in shares. The AO disallowed the interest without establishing this nexus, contrary to the ITAT's instructions. The assessee claimed that there was no nexus between the borrowed funds and investment in shares, asserting that the firm had interest-free funds. The AO, however, maintained that the assessee failed to provide specific details regarding the dates of investment and availability of funds, thus justifying the disallowance under Section 14A.

        Issue 2: Non-adherence to Bombay High Court's Ruling
        The assessee contended that the AO did not follow the Bombay High Court's ruling in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd., which is binding and authoritative. The AO's decision to disallow interest without establishing the nexus was deemed incorrect by the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, relying on various judicial precedents, including the Delhi High Court's decision in Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., which supports disallowance under Section 14A if the AO is unsatisfied with the assessee's claim.

        Issue 3: Disallowance of Interest under Section 14A
        The AO disallowed the interest under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, arguing that the assessee failed to prove the availability of interest-free funds for investment in shares. The CIT(A) supported this view, emphasizing that the assessee's funds were mixed and the specific source of investment in shares was not provided. The AO's disallowance was based on the proportionate expenses allocated against the income earned from such investments.

        Judgment Analysis:
        The ITAT examined the fund flow statements and found that the borrowed funds were utilized in business assets and not in the investment of shares. The ITAT noted that the investments in shares were made between AY 1992-93 to AY 2001-02, and no new investments were made during the relevant assessment year. The ITAT highlighted that the assessee did not earn any dividend income during the year, thus supporting the argument that no disallowance under Section 14A is warranted in the absence of exempt income.

        The ITAT referenced the Delhi High Court's ruling in Cheminvest Ltd., which stated that Section 14A disallowance requires actual receipt of exempt income. The ITAT concluded that there was no direct nexus between the interest-bearing funds and the investment in shares, thus reversing the CIT(A)'s order and allowing the assessee's appeal.

        Conclusion:
        The ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the absence of a direct nexus between borrowed funds and investment in shares, and the lack of exempt income during the relevant assessment year. The appeal was allowed, and the disallowance under Section 14A was reversed.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found