Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT

230 ITR 733Supreme Court of India1998#790 most cited

What is Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

The Supreme Court holds that interest paid under Section 201(1A) of the Income-tax Act, for failure to deduct tax at source, is not an allowable business expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act.

130

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT · 230 ITR 733 SC · Section 37(1) · Section 201(1A) · deductibility of interest · interest on TDS default · not allowable business expenditure · interest on statutory dues · disallowance of interest · interest for failure to deduct tax

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 201(1A)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 69CSection 90(3)Section 37Section 132
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 215section 2(43)section 40(a)(ii)interest under section 201(1a)section 221intra group servicessection 201(1a)section 2(28a)explanation to section 37section 21statutory duesfar analysis

Judgments citing Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT 3(3)(2), Mumbai vs. White Pearl Hotels & Investment Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5500/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 14ASection 14A(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…ing that no disallowance in respect of late payment of TDS can be made in view of the decision of the Hon'ble 2 M/s. White Pearls Hotels & Investment Pvt. Ltd. Supreme Court of India in the Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax 230 ITR 733 wherein it has been held that Interest levied is not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. 3. Brief facts are that during the course of assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had shown investments of Rs.22,17,88,500/- as on 31.03.2013, the value as on 31.03.2014 was shown at Rs.22,27,38,500/- and the details/break-up was…

Vidyut Metallics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle- 38(New Central Circle-6(3), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 5243/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Mar 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5243/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5244/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/S. Vidyut Metallics Pvt.Ltd. Acit-Cc 38 बनाम/ 4Th Floor, Malhotra House [New Central Circle-6(3) 19Th Floor, Air India Building Opp. Gpo, Fort Vs. Mumbai-400 001. Nariman Point, Mumbai-21. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcv-3305-R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha and Shri Dr. Prayag Jha- Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Shri Rajiv Gobgtra - Ld.DR
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)Section 40

…manner alter the character of the payment, namely, its character as income-tax. 9. The learned counsel for the revenue submitted, placing strong reliance on the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. v. CIT[1998] 230 ITR 733/ 98 Taxman 151, that payments required to be made by way of income-tax under the Income-tax Act are not deductible as expenditure and the further amounts which a person may be required to pay by reason of failure to comply with the provisions requiring the payment of the tax are also amounts which cannot be regarded as deductible expenditure unde…

DCIT, Jamshepur vs. M/S Hard Rock Fabrication (P) Ltd, Jamshedpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 26/RAN/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi22 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: None appearedFor Respondent: Shri Inderjit Singh, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234B

…sion in favour of revenue which are as under:- a. CIT vs. Ashoka Mills Ltd (1996) 218 ITR 526 Gujrat b. CIT vs. Raipur Manufacturing Company Ltd 135 CTR 248 Gujrat c. CIT vs. Saraspur Mils (1997) 226 ITR 533 Gujrat d. Bharat Commerce Industries vs. CIT (1998) 230 ITR 733 (SC) Where it has been held that interest paid under any provision of the IT Act, W.T Act etc for late payment or short payment of advance tax, self assessment tax, TDS are not deductible expenses. Hence, deduction claimed of Rs. 1961/- made by the AO is hereby confirmed. During the course of appellate proceeding it is stated that credit balance…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Bangalore Housing Development and Investments, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 557/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Bangalore Housing Development & Investments, The Assistant Commissioner No. 10/1, ITA No. of Income Tax, Lakshminarayana 2014-15 425/Bang/2018 Circle – 1 (2) (1), Complex, Bangalore. Palace Road, Bangalore – 560 052. PAN: AAGFB0819A ITA No. M/s. Bangalore Housing 2013-14 556/Bang/2018 The Deputy Development & Investments, Commissioner of No. 10/1, Lakshminarayana Income Tax, Complex, ITA No. Circle – 1 (2) (1…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Bangalore Housing Development and Investment, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 556/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Bangalore Housing Development & Investments, The Assistant Commissioner No. 10/1, ITA No. of Income Tax, Lakshminarayana 2014-15 425/Bang/2018 Circle – 1 (2) (1), Complex, Bangalore. Palace Road, Bangalore – 560 052. PAN: AAGFB0819A ITA No. M/s. Bangalore Housing 2013-14 556/Bang/2018 The Deputy Development & Investments, Commissioner of No. 10/1, Lakshminarayana Income Tax, Complex, ITA No. Circle – 1 (2) (1…

M/S Bangalore Housing Deveopment & Investments, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 425/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodia

For Appellant: Shri R. Ramakrishna, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Appeal No. Appellant Respondent Year M/s. Bangalore Housing Development & Investments, The Assistant Commissioner No. 10/1, ITA No. of Income Tax, Lakshminarayana 2014-15 425/Bang/2018 Circle – 1 (2) (1), Complex, Bangalore. Palace Road, Bangalore – 560 052. PAN: AAGFB0819A ITA No. M/s. Bangalore Housing 2013-14 556/Bang/2018 The Deputy Development & Investments, Commissioner of No. 10/1, Lakshminarayana Income Tax, Complex, ITA No. Circle – 1 (2) (1…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Bonai Industrial Company Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA no

ITA 1533/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shria. T. Varkey, J.M &Dr. A.L.Saini, A.M आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1533/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit, Cc-1(3)/Kolkata Vs. M/S. Bonai Industrial Company Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare 110-Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Sarani, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaacb 9156 F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1532/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit, Cc-1(3)/Kolkata Vs. M/S. Feegrade & Company Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare 110-Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Sarani, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaacf 6825 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Respondent By :Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15 Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-20, Kolkata,Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment M/S. Bonai Industrial Company Ltd M/S. Feegrade& Company Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2014-15 Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 73

…the assessee. Thus any delay in the payment of TDS by the assessee cannot be linked to the income tax of the assessee and consequently the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) reported in 230 ITR 733 cannot be applied to the case on hand. Thus, in our considered view, the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the instant facts of the case. Thus, we hold that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has wrongly applied the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S Feegrade & Company Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue (in ITA no

ITA 1532/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shria. T. Varkey, J.M &Dr. A.L.Saini, A.M आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1533/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit, Cc-1(3)/Kolkata Vs. M/S. Bonai Industrial Company Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare 110-Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Sarani, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaacb 9156 F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1532/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dcit, Cc-1(3)/Kolkata Vs. M/S. Feegrade & Company Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 3Rd Floor, 8A, Express Tower, 42A, Shakespeare 110-Shantipally, Kolkata – 700 107. Sarani, Kolkata – 700 017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaacf 6825 D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By :Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit Respondent By :Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2018 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/10/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: These Two Appeals Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2014-15 Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-20, Kolkata,Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment M/S. Bonai Industrial Company Ltd M/S. Feegrade& Company Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2014-15 Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

For Appellant: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 73

…the assessee. Thus any delay in the payment of TDS by the assessee cannot be linked to the income tax of the assessee and consequently the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) reported in 230 ITR 733 cannot be applied to the case on hand. Thus, in our considered view, the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the instant facts of the case. Thus, we hold that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has wrongly applied the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Rungta Mines Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1531/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Oct 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tiwari, CIT, ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate
Section 37(1)

…hand. We also find that the Co-ordinate Bench, ITAT, ‘D‘ Bench, Kolkata in the case of supra has discussed the issue thoroughly analyzing with facts of the case laws of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd reported in (1998) 230 ITR 733(SC) & Lachmandas Mathura reported in 254 ITR 799(SC), wherein it was held interest paid on late deposit of sales tax is an allowable deduction u/s. 3791) of the Act. Relevant portion of tribunal order is reproduced herein below:- “12. Heard both the parties and perused the record including the order dt. 30-08- 2017 as relied on by the assessee b…

Yogendra Khandelwal, Jaipur vs. JCIT, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 735/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Sept 2018AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P. C. Jain (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri J. C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 201Section 40

…tem of expenditure. The amount not deducted and remitted has the character of tax and has to be remitted to the State and cannot be utilised by the assessee for its own business. The Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733/ 98 Taxman 151rejected the argument that retention of money payable to the State as tax or income-tax would augment the capital of the assessee and the expenditure incurred, namely, interest paid for the period of such retention, would assume the character of business expenditure. It held that an assessee could not possibly claim that it was borr…

Hta Marketing Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 2(1)(2), Mumbai

ITA 2068/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Hta Marketing Services Dcit-2(1)(2), Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. 3Rd Floor, Peninsula Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Chambers, G.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013. Pan No. Aaacf0692A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ajit C. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, Dr Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Ajit C. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, DR
Section 143(3)Section 201Section 215Section 220(2)Section 37Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “H” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2013-14 HTA Marketing Services DCIT-2(1)(2), Aayakar Pvt. Ltd. 3rd floor, Peninsula Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Chambers, G.K. Marg, Mumbai-400020. Lower Parel, Mumbai- 400013. PAN No. AAACF0692A Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Ajit C. Shah, AR Revenue by : Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, DR Date of Hearing : 04/09/2018 Date of pronouncement : 12/09/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is…

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Nat Steel Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7175/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2011-12 M/S Nat Steel Equipment Dcit-7(1), Private Limited, Mumbai बनाम/ G.D. Ambekar Marg, Vs. Naigaum Road, Mumbai-400014 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacn5119J Assessment Years: 2011-12 Dcit-7(1), M/S Nat Steel Equipment Mumbai बनाम/ Private Limited, G.D. Ambekar Marg, Vs. Naigaum Road, Mumbai-400014 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacn5119J M/S Nat Steel Equipment Pvt. Ltd.

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…tax or TDS is not an allowable deduction. This view find support from various decisions relied upon by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) in para-6.1 including Saraspur Mills Ltd. vs CIT 226 ITR 533 (Guj.), Bharat Commerce and Industry Ltd. vs CIT 230 ITR 733 (Supreme Court). However, the ld. counsel for the assessee contended that proper opportunity was not provided to the assessee to explain its case. Thus, we remand this issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to examine the claim of the assessee and decide in accordance with law, after M/s Nat Steel Equipment Pvt. Ltd. considering the fa…

Nat Steel Equipment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 7(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 7142/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Years: 2011-12 M/S Nat Steel Equipment Dcit-7(1), Private Limited, Mumbai बनाम/ G.D. Ambekar Marg, Vs. Naigaum Road, Mumbai-400014 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacn5119J Assessment Years: 2011-12 Dcit-7(1), M/S Nat Steel Equipment Mumbai बनाम/ Private Limited, G.D. Ambekar Marg, Vs. Naigaum Road, Mumbai-400014 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacn5119J M/S Nat Steel Equipment Pvt. Ltd.

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…tax or TDS is not an allowable deduction. This view find support from various decisions relied upon by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) in para-6.1 including Saraspur Mills Ltd. vs CIT 226 ITR 533 (Guj.), Bharat Commerce and Industry Ltd. vs CIT 230 ITR 733 (Supreme Court). However, the ld. counsel for the assessee contended that proper opportunity was not provided to the assessee to explain its case. Thus, we remand this issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer to examine the claim of the assessee and decide in accordance with law, after M/s Nat Steel Equipment Pvt. Ltd. considering the fa…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1798/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…the assessee. Thus any delay in the payment of TDS by the assessee cannot be linked to the income tax of the assessee and consequently the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) reported in 230 ITR 733 cannot be applied to the case on hand. Thus, in our considered view, the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the instant facts of the case. Thus, we hold that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has wrongly applied the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1797/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…the assessee. Thus any delay in the payment of TDS by the assessee cannot be linked to the income tax of the assessee and consequently the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) reported in 230 ITR 733 cannot be applied to the case on hand. Thus, in our considered view, the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the instant facts of the case. Thus, we hold that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has wrongly applied the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

ACIT, CC-3(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Narayani Sons. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1796/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 43B

…the assessee. Thus any delay in the payment of TDS by the assessee cannot be linked to the income tax of the assessee and consequently the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (1998) reported in 230 ITR 733 cannot be applied to the case on hand. Thus, in our considered view, the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the instant facts of the case. Thus, we hold that the Assessing Officer in the instant case has wrongly applied the principle laid down by the Hon'ble…

Allied Media Network P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3545/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Allied Media Network Pvt. Dcit, Range-7(1), Aayakar Ltd., P-2, Level 3, Percept Bhavan, M.K. Marg Vs. House, 22 Raghuvanshi Mumbai-400020 Estate, 11/12 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013. Pan No. Aadcp9975H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Pankaj Jain, Ar Revenue By : Ms. S. Padmaja, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 05/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/06/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Pankaj Jain, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…tem of expenditure. The amount not deducted and remitted has the character of tax and has to be remitted to the State and cannot be utilised by the assessee for its own business. The Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 733/ 98 Taxman Allied Media Network Pvt. 10 151 rejected the argument that retention of money payable to the State as tax or income-tax would augment the capital of the assessee and the expenditure incurred, namely, interest paid for the period of such retention, would assume the character of business expenditure. It held that an assessee could not…

ACIT, Corporate Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Taqa Neyveli Power Company Power P Ltd, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 150/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jun 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep Bagmar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Vijaya Prabha, JCIT
Section 11ASection 37Section 37(1)

…on delayed payment of sale tax and hence no applicable to the facts of the case in hand. 2.3 The learned CIT(A) ought to have followed the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Bharat Commerce Industries Limited (153 ITR 275) wherein the Apex Court held that any interest payable for default committed by the assessee in discharging his statutory liability is not allowable expenditure. 3. For these and other grounds that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the order of the learned CIT (A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restor…

Dnv Gl As (Formerly Known As Det Norske Veritas As), Mumbai vs. DCIT(It)2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3067/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Amarjit Singhअयकर ऄपऩल सं./I.T.A. No.3067/Mum/2016 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) Dnv Gl As बनधम/ The Dcit (Intl. Taxn.), (Formerly Known As Det Norske Veritas 2(1)(1) Air India Building, Vs. 17Th Floor, Nariman Point, As) Equinor Business Park Mumbai-400 021. Tower 3, 6Th Floor Off Bandra-Kurla Complex, Lbs Marg, Kurla (West), Mumbai-400 070. स्थधयऩ लेखध सं./Pan :Aabcd 9812 F (ऄपऩलधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Virendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh-CIT-DR

…is order assessee is in appeal before us. 3.1. We have heard both the Counsel and perused the records. We find that this issue is covered in favour of the Revenue by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bharat Commerce & Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (230 ITR 733). In this case the Hon’ble Apex Court has expounded as under :- “Held When interest is paid for committing a default in respect of a statutory liability to pay advance tax, the amount paid and the expenditure incurred in that connection is in no way connected with preserving or promoting the business of the assessee. This is not expenditure whic…

M/S Saj Food Products Pvt. Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-12, Kolkata

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

ITA 1887/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Ao As 1 Well As Before Him In The First Appellate Stage & Confirmed The Impugned Addition Made By The Ao On This Count.

For Appellant: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Arindam Bhattacharya, Addl.CIT, ld. Sr.DR
Section 37(1)

…017 of this Tribunal in the case of supra, which held that interest paid on delayed deposit of TDS is an allowable deduction by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bharat Commerce Industries Ltd Vs. CIT reported in (1998) 230 ITR 733 (SC). The Co-ordinate Bench also referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lachmandas Mathura Vs. CIT reported in 254 ITR 799 (SC), which held interest paid on late deposit of sales tax is an allowable deduction U/Sec. 37(1) of the Act. Relevant portion of order dt. 30- 08-2017 is reproduced herein below for better understa…