How many judgments cite Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT?

63 judgments on BharatTax cite Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT (34 ITR 265), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 36(1)(iii), Section 41(1), Section 68, Section 10(2)(iii), Section 142(1).

Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT

34 ITR 265High Court1958#1796 most cited

What is Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT authority for?

For claiming a deduction of interest paid on borrowed capital under Section 36(1)(iii), an assessee must show that the capital was used for business purposes; the nature of the asset acquired (revenue or capital) with such capital is irrelevant.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT · 34 ITR 265 · Section 36(1)(iii) · interest on borrowed capital deduction · business purpose · revenue asset · capital asset · loan utilization · income tax deduction

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 36(1)(iii)Section 41(1)Section 68 Section 10(2)(iii)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(l)(iii)section 36(l)project completion method section 10(2)percentage completion method section 36(1)(iii)section 245d section 43(1)put to use mercantile system of accounting section 36(1)section 36

Judgments citing Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi II vs. Monnet Industries Ltd

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA/450/2008HC Delhi21 Nov 2008

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

For Respondent: Mr R.D. Jolly

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…and added to the cost of fixed assets which have been created as a result of such expenditure.” 6.4 The Gujarat High Court, after analyzing the decision of the Bombay High Court in Calico Dyeing and Printing Works v. Commissioner of Income Tax: (1958) 34 ITR 265 and of the Supreme Court in India Cements Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax: (1966) 60 ITR 52 and in Challapalli Sugars Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax: (1975) 98 ITR 167, concluded as follows:- “…. It is no doubt true that in the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd the Supreme Court has unequivocally observed that interest paid on the borrowi…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi II vs. Monnet Industries Ltd

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA - 450 / 2008HC Delhi21 Nov 2008

For Respondent: Mr R.D. Jolly

Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 260A

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Core Health Care Ltd

C.A. No.-003952-003955 - 2002Supreme Court08 Feb 2008

For Respondent: M/s. Core Health Care Ltd

Section 260ASection 28Section 36(1)(iii)Section 43(1)

…n borrowed by the assessee; secondly, it must have been borrowed for the purpose of business; and, thirdly, the assessee must have paid interest on the borrowed amount [See: Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. Commr. Of Income-tax, Bombay City-II \026(1958) 34 ITR 265]. All that is germane is : whether the borrowing was, or was not, for the purpose of business. The expression "for the purpose of business" occurring in Section 36(1)(iii) indicates that once the test of "for the purpose of business" is satisfied in respect of the capital borrowed, the assessee would be entitled to deduction under Section…