ERANTHUS DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(2), MUMBAI
What were the facts?
The assessee company incurred interest expenditure on unsecured Compulsorily Convertible Debentures (CCDs) issued to an associated enterprise. The Assessing Officer (AO) and Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) treated these CCDs as equity and determined the arm's length price (ALP) of interest at Nil, making a significant adjustment.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that fully and compulsorily convertible debentures are hybrid instruments that remain debt instruments until conversion into equity. The re-characterization of CCDs as equity for transfer pricing purposes by the revenue authorities was not sustained.
What were the issues?
Whether the revenue authorities were justified in re-characterizing CCDs as equity to determine the arm's length price of interest, and whether the assessment order was time-barred.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B,Section 153,Section 92(2),Section 36(1)(iii),Section 37(1),Section 234D,Section 144BA,Section 98
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE & MS. RATNA DASGUPTA
PER: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, (JM):
The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department [for brevity “Ld. AO”], order passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for ITA 8997/MUM/2025
brevity ‘the Act’), for Assessment Year 2022-23, date of order 16.10.2025. The impugned order originated by pursuing the o
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144C(3)
- Neha Hiranand Motwani, Nashik vs ITO International Tax, NashikITA 1570/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- ACIT-Circle 6(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7767/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- ACIT-Circle6(1)(1) Mumbai., Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Real Estate Limited, MumbaiITA 7766/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Atc Tires Private Limited, Mumbai vs The Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 6468/MUM/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- M/S. Jsw Cement Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4867/MUM/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Chandan Patra, Bbsr vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S Corbett Kyari Jungle Resort vs. The State Tax OfficerUttarakhand · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S N B Enterprises vs. The Assistant CommissionerUttarakhand · 6 Oct 2026
- Sumit Bhoora vs. M/ S Aadharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026
- Jayesh Patel vs. M/S Aasharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026