DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NEVILLE TULI, MUMBAI

ITA 3203/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 November 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that interest paid on borrowed funds for property purchase, prior to the insertion of specific provisions by the Finance Act, 2023, is deductible while computing capital gains. This decision followed various High Court judgments.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed long-term capital gains by deducting indexed cost of acquisition and indexed cost of interest paid on borrowed funds for property purchase. The Assessing Officer disallowed the interest cost, considering it not a capital expenditure for improvement or acquisition.

What were the issues?

Whether interest paid on borrowed funds for property acquisition can be considered as part of the cost of acquisition for computing capital gains, and if indexation is applicable to such interest cost.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 55,Section 24(b),Section 48

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(11)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 BENCH “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Ld. Senior Advocate, Shri Manish Kant, Ld. Advocate &, Shri Shekhar Gupta, Ld. A.R
For Respondent: Shri Preetam kumar Turerao, Ld. SR. AR
Hearing: 11.11.2024Pronounced: 26.11.2024

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 13.07.2023, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2013-14. 2 Mr. Neville Tuli

2.

Brief facts relevant for adjudication of this appeal are that the Assessee had sold the property valued at Rs.27,00,00,000/- which was purchased from borrowed

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 55

All 127 judgments and leading authorities on Section 55 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →