DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 7(1), MUMBAI , MUMBAI vs. RARE ENTERPRISES, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that while the interest income itself might not be taxable due to non-receipt and the debtor's financial condition, the TDS deducted on this amount cannot be ignored. The assessee cannot claim TDS credit without offering the corresponding income, nor can they use the TDS to offset other income if they choose the cash system for this component.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of Rs. 3.6 Crores added as interest income. The assessee claimed it did not receive this interest from a debtor company (Dharti) which had become an NPA. However, the debtor had deducted TDS on this interest.
What were the issues?
Whether interest income not actually received due to the debtor's financial distress is taxable, and how to treat TDS deducted on such income when the assessee claims non-receipt.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the Revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A)- 49, Mumbai, vide order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1059630932(1), dated 11.01.2024, against the assessment order passed by the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7(1), Mumbai, u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 16.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2 Rare Enterprises, AY 2018-19 The grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are as under:
"On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in concluding that the assessee did not receive the i
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 198
- Hanoze Harish Thakkar, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer Ward 19(1)(5), MumbaiITA 9314/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Netscout Systems Industrial Private… vs DCIT- Circle 1(3)(1), MumbaiITA 3582/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed8 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Anita Grover, Delhi vs Income Tax Officer, DelhiITA 4305/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2019-20
- Knight Frank Property Services Private… vs Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 1247/MUM/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Jul 2026AY 2018-19
- JCIT(OSD)(E) Circle-1 Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad vs Gujarat Maritime Board, GandhinagarITA 212/AHD/2023[2019-20]Status: Disposed13 May 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026