BANK OF BARODA,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2392/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 August 2025AY 2020-21Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Judicial Member), Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ( (Accountant Member)11 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the addition of foreign branch income, citing previous decisions against the assessee. The claim for lease premium as revenue expenditure was disallowed, but the alternate claim for depreciation was remanded. The disallowance of interest paid for delayed TDS remittance was confirmed.

What were the facts?

The assessee bank excluded income from its foreign branches, but the AO and CIT(A) added it back, relying on Section 90(3) and a notification. The assessee also claimed lease premium as revenue expenditure or sought depreciation on it as an intangible asset. Additionally, interest paid for delayed TDS remittance was disallowed.

What were the issues?

Whether income of foreign branches is taxable in India, and whether interest paid for delayed TDS remittance is allowable as business expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90(3),Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(13)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui
Pronounced: 26/08/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 1243/MUM/2025
ITA No. 2392/MUM/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Omkareshwar Chidara (AM) :- The issues involved in all the above four appeals are common and hence they were clubbed and heard together. Accordingly, a common order is hereby passed for all the four above appeals.

2.

The first ground of appeal in all these appeals relates to exclusion of income of foreign branches of the appellant company for taxation purposes. The appellant has excluded the income for tax purposes earned in 19 foreign branches of bank. The Ld. AO relying on the provisions of section 90(3) with Notification No. S.O. 2123 dated 28.8.2003 and the decision of

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →