THE DY CIT CIR 1(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPN LTD, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided that income from housing finance for residential purposes for less than 5 years and income from temporary deployment of funds in treasury operations are eligible for deduction under Section 36(1)(viii). However, income from housing finance for non-residential purposes is not eligible. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to re-compute the eligible profit.
What were the facts?
The assessee, HDFC Bank (successor to Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd.), is a housing finance institution. The appeals concern assessment years 1999-2000 to 2001-02, involving issues related to disallowance of provision for exchange loss, computation of deduction under Section 36(1)(viii), and exemption of dividend and bond interest income.
What were the issues?
The key issues were whether provisions for exchange loss were allowable and how to compute profits eligible for deduction under Section 36(1)(viii), considering various types of income and expense allocations.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 36(1)(viii),Section 10(33),Section 10(23G),Section 45
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- Ltd. v. CIT37 citing79 ITR 589 · 1971 · SC
- CIT v. Jayanand Khira & Co. (P.) Ltd.6 citing170 ITR 31
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ITA Nos.7532/MUM/2004 & others HDFC Bank Ltd. AYs 1999-2000, 2000-01 & 2001-02 PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
All these six appeals by the assessee and Rev
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 36(1)(viii)
- Sundaram Home Finance Ltd., Chennai vs ITO, Corporate Ward-6(1), ChennaiITA 1996/CHNY/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Sundaram Home Finance Limited, Chennai vs CIT, ChennaiITA 1778/CHNY/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Sundaram Home Finance Limited, Chennai vs CIT, ChennaiITA 1777/CHNY/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Bandhan Bank Limited, Kolkata vs DCIT-6(1), KolkataITA 965/KOL/2026[2018-2019]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2018-2019
- Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Small Industries Development Bank of India…ITA 870/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026