ACIT, VILLUPURAM CIRCLE, VILLUPURAM vs. KALLAKURICHI CO.OP.SUGAR MILLS LTD, VILLUPURAM
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that repayment of loans to the Government of Tamil Nadu for working capital does not fall under Section 43B. The CIT(Appeals) had rightly followed previous Tribunal orders on identical issues.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer disallowed interest payments made by co-operative sugar mills under Section 43B, believing the loans were from a financial institution. The assessees argued the loans were working capital from the Government of Tamil Nadu.
What were the issues?
Whether interest payments on working capital loans obtained from the state government are disallowable under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI SANJAY ARORA
आदेश /O R D E R
PER BENCH: All the four appeals of the Revenue in respect of two independent assessees are directed against the respective orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Puducherry, dated 30.06.2017 for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. Since common issue arises for consideration in all these appeals, we heard these appeals together and disposing of the same by this common order.
The only issue arises for consideration in all these appeals is disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') in respect of interest payment.
We heard Shri N. Madhavan, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri S. Venugopalan and Shri B. Gowthaman, the Ld. representatives of the assessees. The assessee-co- operative societies were allotted working capital by Government of Tamil Nadu. In fact, National Co-operative Development Corporation has sanctioned the loan under Corporation Sponsored Scheme to Government of Tamil Nadu. The payment of interest was disallowed by the Assessing Officer under Section 43B of the Act. The Assessing Officer was under the impression that the loan was sanctioned by a financial institution, namely, National Co-op. Development Corporation, New Delhi. Referring to a Government Order in RcNo.16890/Cane-1/2001 dated 15.03.2002, the Ld. representatives of the assessees brought to the notice of the Bench that the loan was sanctioned to Government of Tamil Nadu which is to be utilised as working capital by co-operative sugar mills in the State. Therefore, according to the Ld. representatives, the repayment has to be made to Government of Tamil Nadu by the assessees and not to National Co-op. Development Corporation.
An identical issue came before this Tribunal in the assessees’ own case for assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2012-13. This Tribunal by placing its reliance on another order of this Tribunal in DCIT v. The Kallakurichi Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd., Unit-II in dated 14.12.2012, found that the repayment of loan by the assessee to Government of Tamil Nadu would not fall under Section 43B of the Act. Since the facts are identical to that of assessment years 2008- 09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2012-13 in the assessees’ own case, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the decision of the co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal dated 28.09.2016 is squarely applicable to the facts of the case. In view of the above, the CIT(Appeals) has rightly followed the order of this Tribunal. Hence, this Tribunal does not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.
In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed.
Order pronounced on 30th November, 2017 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 43B
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Private… vs The Dy CIT Circle 8(2)(1), MumbaiITA 8020/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Amritvarsha Industries Limited, Ambedkar… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6481/DEL/2026[2010-2011]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2010-2011
- Karaj Singh, Haryana vs PCIT (Central) Gurgaon, GurgaonITA 642/CHANDI/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- ACIT, Mumbai vs Imp Powers Limited, MumbaiITA 4982/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2012-13
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026