Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta

119 ITR 372High Court1979#4282 most cited

What is Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta authority for?

Interest paid on borrowed funds for acquiring an asset should be included in the cost of acquisition for the purpose of determining capital gains. The actual cost includes all expenditure incurred to bring the asset into existence, as understood in commercial practice.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Addl CIT v K.S. Gupta · 119 ITR 372 · cost of acquisition · interest on borrowed funds · capital gains · section 48 · date of transfer · actual cost · expenditure incurred · fixed asset

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 48Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 14ASection 234C

Issues it is cited on

section 55section 48date of transfersection 50csection 50fair market valuesection 143(2)transfercompanybusinesssection 143(3)section 143

Judgments citing Addl. CIT v. K.S. Gupta

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5157/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ ‘फी’, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.5157 to 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 to 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. ACIT, CC-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN/GIR No. : AACPD 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearin…

Sri Nand Kishore Khemani, Kolkata vs. The C.I.T Kolkata - III, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 93/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Mar 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 48

…12B(2)(ii) of Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 for the purpose of determining the capital gain derived from the sale of land. To the similar effect is the decision of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Additional CIT –vs.- K.S. Gupta reported in 119 ITR 372 cited by the ld. counsel for the assessee, wherein it was held that interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on the amount borrowed for acquisition of the capital asset and capitalized in the books of account must be included in the actual cost of the site. Although the ld. D.R. has cited the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in t…

Gmr Power Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal viz

ITA 1072/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao & M/S.Gmr Power Corporation Ltd. 25/1, Skip House, Museum Road, Bangalore. … Appellant Pan:Aaacg 6037 G Vs. 1. Addl.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-11, Bangalore. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore … Respondent & (By The Revenue) ******** Assessee By: Shri Yogesh A Thar, Ca. Revenue By: Smt.Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr).

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A Thar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 57Section 57(111)

…rest to the cost of the shares held such interest to be treated as part of cost and reduced from the sale consideration in computing the capital gains. • S Balan V DCIT (308 ITR 151) (Pune) (AT) • CIT V Mithlesh Kumari (92 ITR 9) (Del) • Addl CIT V K S Gupta (119 ITR 372) (AP) • CIT V Maithreyi Pai (152 ITR 247) (Karn) • CIT V Indian Overseas Bank Ltd (222 ITR 77) (Mad) 4.2 The appellant humbly prays that the Assessing Officer be directed to add the disallowance made under 14A to the cost of mutual fund units.” In this view of the matter, we are of the view that it would be in the fitness of things to remand this…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Gmr Power Corporation Ltd., (Formerly Known As Gmr Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal viz

ITA 1629/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao & M/S.Gmr Power Corporation Ltd. 25/1, Skip House, Museum Road, Bangalore. … Appellant Pan:Aaacg 6037 G Vs. 1. Addl.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-11, Bangalore. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore … Respondent & (By The Revenue) ******** Assessee By: Shri Yogesh A Thar, Ca. Revenue By: Smt.Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr).

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A Thar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 57Section 57(111)

…rest to the cost of the shares held such interest to be treated as part of cost and reduced from the sale consideration in computing the capital gains. • S Balan V DCIT (308 ITR 151) (Pune) (AT) • CIT V Mithlesh Kumari (92 ITR 9) (Del) • Addl CIT V K S Gupta (119 ITR 372) (AP) • CIT V Maithreyi Pai (152 ITR 247) (Karn) • CIT V Indian Overseas Bank Ltd (222 ITR 77) (Mad) 4.2 The appellant humbly prays that the Assessing Officer be directed to add the disallowance made under 14A to the cost of mutual fund units.” In this view of the matter, we are of the view that it would be in the fitness of things to remand this…

Gmr Power Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, assessee’s appeal viz

ITA 1556/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri Vijay Pal Rao & M/S.Gmr Power Corporation Ltd. 25/1, Skip House, Museum Road, Bangalore. … Appellant Pan:Aaacg 6037 G Vs. 1. Addl.Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Range-11, Bangalore. 2. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(2), Bangalore … Respondent & (By The Revenue) ******** Assessee By: Shri Yogesh A Thar, Ca. Revenue By: Smt.Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr).

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A Thar, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 57Section 57(111)

…rest to the cost of the shares held such interest to be treated as part of cost and reduced from the sale consideration in computing the capital gains. • S Balan V DCIT (308 ITR 151) (Pune) (AT) • CIT V Mithlesh Kumari (92 ITR 9) (Del) • Addl CIT V K S Gupta (119 ITR 372) (AP) • CIT V Maithreyi Pai (152 ITR 247) (Karn) • CIT V Indian Overseas Bank Ltd (222 ITR 77) (Mad) 4.2 The appellant humbly prays that the Assessing Officer be directed to add the disallowance made under 14A to the cost of mutual fund units.” In this view of the matter, we are of the view that it would be in the fitness of things to remand this…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Vembu Vaidyanathan, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5749/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Shri Vembu Vaidyanathan, Circle-3(1), B-1602, Beaumonde बनाम/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Apartments, Appa Saheb Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400028 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaipv5796J Shri B. Yadagiri-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Vijay C. Kothari

Section 4(1)

…nterest thereon and as such interest has not been allowed in computation of taxable income of the assessee, such interest is deductible while computing capital gains either is cost or is improvement in the asset. The ratio laid down in Addl. CIT vs K.S. Gupta 119 ITR 372 (AP), CIT vs Mithilesh Kumari 92 ITR 9 (Del.), CIT vs M. Pai 152 ITR 247 (Karn.) and Naozar Chenoy vs CIT 234 ITR 95 (AP). Section 48, which is meant for capital gains clearly envisages allowbility of 9 Vembu Vaidyanathan such expenditure which is incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer and for the purpose of cost of acqu…

Gyanshankar Investments & Trading Co. P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 9(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4835/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri S T Bidari
Section 271(1)(c)Section 48

…wing for purchase of shares were treated as part of cost while computing the capital gain on sale of shares :- CIT vs Shri Hariram Hotels Pvt Ltd 325 ITR 136 (Karn) CIT vs Maithreyi Pai 152 ITR 247 (Karn) CIT vs Mithlesh Kumari 92 ITR 9 Addl. CIT vs K S Gupta 119 ITR 372 Naozar Chenoy vs CIT 234 ITR 95 Thus assessee’s claim was well supported by the decisions of Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs Maithreyi Pai (152 ITR 147) and Sri Hariram Hotels (P) Limited (supra). It is not the case that the assessee had made any untenable claim in law or has furnished any inaccurate particulars of income. If the ass…