How many judgments cite Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT?

185 judgments on BharatTax cite Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT (98 ITR 167), spanning 2007 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 37(1), Section 115JB, Section 234A, Section 250, Section 40A(2)(b), Section 43B.

Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT

98 ITR 167Supreme Court of India1975#514 most cited

What is Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest on borrowed capital utilized for acquiring a capital asset is capitalized until business commences. Once business is set up, this interest is deductible under section 36(1)(iii) even if the asset has not yet been put to use, accepting commercial accounting standards in the absence of contrary statutory provisions.

185

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT · 98 ITR 167 · Section 36(1)(iii) · Section 32 · capitalization of interest · actual cost · borrowed capital · commencement of business · asset put to use · deductibility of interest · accounting standards · mercantile system

Also reported as

3 SCC 572

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 115JB Section 234A Section 250 Section 40A(2)(b)Section 43B Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(5)section 32(1)(iia)section 32(1)demerger additional depreciation right to receive section 92b section 32 section 22 section 57 put to use mercantile system of accounting

Judgments citing Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT

L & T Transco P.Ltd, Chennai vs. Asst CIT 1(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2190/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: None

Section 143(3)

…. 4. During the course of hearing the Ld. DR was asked to explain why it should be treated as capital expenditure. He submitted that issue in controversy is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd. Vs. CIT[(1975) 98 ITR 167] where the court held that the expenditure necessary to bring into existence and to put the cases in working conditions would be capital in nature. 5. Having heard the Ld. DR, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has held that the assessee company has not brought on any material to demonstrate that commercial operations of the business of promoting…

Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2298/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. No 2298/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Coastal Gujarat Power Limited, The Income Tax Officer 34, Sant Tukaram Road, 6(2)(1), फनाभ/ Carnac Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400009 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी की ओय से / Applicant By : Shri Farrokh V Irani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri M C Omi Ningshen सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of : 15.3.2017 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai, Dated25.2.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Raised By The Assessee Is Against Upholding The Order Of Assessing Officer As Regards Interest Income From Securities Deposited With Paschim Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd (Hereinafter Referred To As Pgvcl) For Availing Electricity For The Purposes Of Construction Of Power

For Respondent: Shri M C Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)

…see. These receipts are inextricably linked with the setting up of the capital structure of the assessee-company. They must, therefore, be viewed as capital receipts going to reduce the cost of construction. In the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT[1975] 98 ITR 167, this Court examined the question whether interest paid before the commencement of production by a company on amounts borrowed for the acquisition and installation of plant and machinery would form a part of the actual cost of the asset to the assessee within the meaning of that expression in section 10(5) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and wh…

ITO 16(2)(4), Mumbai vs. Surya Gems, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 292/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-16(2)(4), M/S Surya Gems, बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Flat No.4, 02Nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Bhaveshwar Sgar Patel Vs. Mumbai-400007 Compound 20 Napean Sea Road, Mumbai-400020 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aakfs6513Q याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist-Dr यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

…this effect but actual disallowance has been made by treating the impugned amount as contingent liability. 47. Now, we will consider the issue with reference to Accounting Standard -11 (AS- 11). The Hon‘ble Supreme Court in the case of Chellapali Sugar Mills, 98 ITR 167 and the Hon‘ble Delhi High court in the case of Woodward Governor of India P.Ltd (supra) observed that the accounting standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India required that accounting policies must be governed by the principle of prudence. Accounting Standards are prepared by ICAI keeping in view of the principle 26 M/s…

Sanjay J Ahuja, Mumbai vs. ITO 19(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 5731/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Ramlal Negishri Sanjay J. Ahuja, 202, Flat No.11, Shahnaj Building, New New India Bank, S.V.Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan:Adepa 2739H ...... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer 19(3)(4), Piramal Chambers, Parel Mumbai 400 011 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Haridas BhatFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Kardam

Section 50C

…at the Tribunal has followed the decision rendered by it in the case of CIT Vs. Herdilla Chemicals Ltd (1995)(216 ITR 742), which was, in turn, rendered by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd Vs. CIT (98 ITR 167), wherein it was held that the expenses relating to installation and even interest on borrowed capital for acquiring plant and machinery should be treated as part of cost of machinery. 18. In the instant case, we notice that the consultancy fee, freight charges, warranty expenses, finance charges are connected with the purchase of wind mill befor…

DCIT, CC-Xxv, Kolkata vs. M/S Dpil Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue on this ground is dismissed

ITA 209/KOL/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Dec 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Dr. A.L.Saini, Am & Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No209/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2002-2003) Dcit, Cc-Xxv, Vs. M/S Dpil Limited, 110, Shantipally, 4B, Hungerford Street, 5Th Floor, Suvira House, Kolkata-700107 Kolkata-700017 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcd 1665 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Biswanath Das, Jcit "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Agnibesh Sengupta, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/11/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 05/12/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Revenue, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2002-2003, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-Iv,Kolkata, In Appeal No.160/Cit(A)-Iv/04-05, Dated 30.09.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 15.02.2005. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.10.2002 Along With The Audited Balance Sheet & The Tax Audit Report, Declaring A Loss Of Rs.5,18,44,247/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny U/S.143(3) Of The Act & The Ao Has Completed The Assessment By Making The Addition On Account Of Interest On Term Loan, Proportionate Expenses On Account Of Exempted Income U/S 14A

For Appellant: Shri Agnibesh Sengupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…on of tea estate on 01- 4-1999 and interest was paid in the post acquisition period to ICICI Bank. Such payments of interest are allowable under section 36(1)(iii) of the IT. Act and the issue is settled as in the case of Challapalli Sugar ltd. Vs. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167(SC) and Calico dyeing Vs. CIT (1958) 34 ITR 265 (Bombay). It seems that the main contention of the Assessing officer has been the comment in the schedule 16 Clause 5 of the notes on accounts of Annual financial Statement which stated :- “Interest on borrowing for acquisition of tea estates now held by the company by virtue of amalgamation of compa…

ACIT 25(1), Mumbai vs. G Shoes Exports, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6209/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 5736/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) G. Shoes Exports Asst. Cit-25(1)/Cit City 25 बनाम/ 2Nd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, 1, Hitex Industrial Estate, S. V. Road, Dahisar (E), Bandra (E), Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Mumbai-400 068 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacfg 5376 P (Assessee) : (Revenue) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 6209/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बनाम/ Asst. Cit-25(1), G. Shoes Exports Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 068 Vs. (Revenue) : (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Radheshyam Jain : Shri Airiju Jaikaran Revenue By सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.06.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 24.10.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are Cross Appeals, I.E., By The Assessee & The Revenue, Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-35, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 16.7.2014, Partly Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting It’S Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11 Vide Order Dated 20.3.2013. 2

For Appellant: Shri Radheshyam Jain

Section 143(3)Section 32(1)

…run is thus a testing phase before which a plant can be declared as fit and ready for use, i.e., commissioned. No wonder, all the expenditure up to this stage stands to be capitalized as cost of the project (also refer: Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC)). How, then, can a plant or machinery be regarded as being capable of being used, much less actually used, even if passively, prior thereto? 3.4 The facts in Industrial Solvents & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (supra) are relevant. The issue that arose in that case was as to when the business, plant and machinery could be said to be ready to use for t…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Porbandar Solar Power Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6539/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhuassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-3’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 ACIT, CIRCLE 20(1), vs. M/S PORBANDAR SOLAR POWER LTD. 616A (6TH FLOOR) DEVIKA TOWER NEW DELHI NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI – 19 (PAN: AAFCM9611B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Department by : Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR Assessee by : Shri Sanjeev Kapoor, CA Date of Hearing : 22-08-2016 Date of Order : 30-08-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, J.M. The Department has filed the Appeal against the impugned order dated 02.9.2015 of Ld. CIT(A)-7, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2012-13. The groun…

Haldia Petrochemicals Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for A

ITA 2114/KOL/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

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

Section 115JSection 32

…I.T.A. No. 47/KOL./2010 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Assessment Year: 2007-2008, Assessment Year: 2006-2007 & Assessment Year: 2007-2008 Page 1 of 22 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 2114/KOL/ 2009 Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Haldia Petrochemicals Limited,..................................................Appellant 1, Aucland Place, Kolkata-700 017 [PAN: AAACH 7360 R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,......................................................................Respondent Ward-12(…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ge Capital Transportation Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 767/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Jarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T Vasanthan, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…Co. Vs DCIT (1965) 16 STC 213 (S.C.); ii) P Mohammed Meerakhan Vs CIT (1969) 73 ITR 735 (S.C.); iii) CIT Vs Basti Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. 257 ITR 88 (Del.); iv) CITVs U P Stat Industrial Corpn. (1997) 225 ITR 703 (S.C.); v) Challapalli Sugars Ltd. Vs CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167 (S.C.); vi) Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. 82 ITR 363 (S.C.) 7.11 Ld. A.R. submitted that the decision relied upon by the Ld. D.R. in case of Motor & General Sales (P) Ltd. vs CIT (supra) is distinguishable as the case deals with 11 I.T.A.No.763,514/Del/2011 assessment year 1968-69, which is much before the concept of hire purchase got a statutory…

Ge Capital Services India, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 514/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Jarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri T Vasanthan, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

Mahindra Telecommunications Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2832/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2832/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Mahindra Telecommunications Income Tax Officer, 2(2)(3), बनाम/ Investment Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Gateway Building, Apollo Bunder, Vs. Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 3774 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. P. Mahajani ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Randhir Gupta सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.02.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 24.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 18.1.2012, Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09 Vide Order Dated 30.12.2010. 2. The Background Facts The Facts Of The Case Are Simple & Undisputed. The Assessee-Company, Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956, Pursuant To A Shareholders’ Agreement Dated March

For Appellant: Shri H. P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Shri Randhir Gupta

Section 143(3)

…as to be for a particular period. Continuing further, the Hon’ble Apex Court has time and again clarified that in the absence of any specific provision, it is the principles of commercial accounting that would hold (viz. Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC)). Accounting Standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), which is the regulatory body for the profession of accountancy in India, are 7 Mahindra Telecommunications Investment Private Limited vs. ITO also relevant. These Accounting Standards are binding on companies in view of the Companies Act, 1956, so that th…

Mahindra Navistar Automotives Ltd, Pune vs. DCIT 2(2)

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3324/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 3324 & 4645/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) Mahindra Navistar Automotives Dy. Cit, 2(2), Limited, Mumbai बनाम/ 128 A, Sanghavi Compound, Off. Mumbai Pune Highway, Vs. Opp. Jayashree Cinema, Chinchwad, Pune-411 019 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacm 7863 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri H. P. Mahajani ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri N. P. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 17.02.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 13.05.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: These Are A Set Of Two Appeals By The Assessee Agitating Its Assessments, I.E., As Modified By The First Appellate Authority, For Two Consecutive Years Being Assessment Under The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2007-08 & 2008-09. The Appeals Raising Common Issues Were Listed For & Are Accordingly Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of, By The Common, Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Shri H. P. MahajaniFor Respondent: Shri N. P. Singh

Section 32(1)(i)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35(1)Section 37(1)Section 40

…and legal principles. We, accordingly, endorse same. The Hon’ble Apex Court has time and again clarified that in the absence of any specific provision, it is the principles of commercial accounting that would hold (viz. Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC)). Accounting Standard (AS) 10 issued by ICAI, titled ‘Accounting for Fixed Assets’, clearly states that 3 ITA Nos. 3324 & 4645/Mum/2013 (A.Ys. 2007-08 & 2008-09) Mahindra Navistar Automotives Limited vs. Dy. CIT Main Principles ‘20. The cost of a fixed asset should comprise its purchase price and any attributable cost of bringing the asset to…

D.C.I.T Cir - 4, Kolkata vs. M/S Asian Tea & Exports Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1241/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P..M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Sanjoy Mukherjee, JCIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri S.D.Verma, Advocate & Sri Sanjeev Kadel, FCA

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)

…in the nature of expenditure/accrued liability, have to be taken into account while preparing financial statements 23. The Special Bench also applied the principle enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Challapalli Sugars Ltd. vs. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167 (SC) that the Accounting Standards issued by ICAI which are mandatory for preparation of financial statements have to be followed in as much as the deviation from the same is to be reported in the audit report. AS-11 mandates that in a situation like in the present case, since the transaction is not settled in the same accounting period, the effec…

Century Enka Limited, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Mumbai, Pune

In the result for statistical purpose the appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 215/KOL/2012[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 1995-96

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ]

For Appellant: Ms.Shreya Loyalka, FCA & Shri Akash Mansinka, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Tanuj Neogi, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 57

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM ] I.T.A.215/Kol/2012 Assessment Year : 1995-96 Century Enka Limited (in the matter -versus- A.C.I.T., Circle-1, Of Rajashree Polyfil Ltd.)Pune Mumbai. (PAN:AABCC2491D) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Ms.Shreya Loyalka, FCA & Shri Akash Mansinka, FCA For the Respondent: Shri Tanuj Neogi, JCIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11.02.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 02.03.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 16.12.2011 of CIT(A)-VI, Ko…

Mahagun Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4419/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.R. Singh, CIT, DR

Section 153A

…for construction of any work and which cannot be made profitable for a long period subject to certain restrictions contained in Section (2) to (7) of Section 208. This section was specifically noted by the Supreme Court in Challapalli Sugars Ltd vs CIT(1975) 98 ITR 167. The Supreme Court went on to observe at page 175 as follows: "We have already referred to section 208 of the Companies Act which makes provision for payment of interest on share capital in certain contingencies. Clause (b) of sub-Section (1) of that section provides that in case interest is paid on share capital issued for the purpose of raising…

Mahagun Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4418/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. I.C.Sudhir, Jm & Sh. Prashant Maharishi, Am

For Appellant: Sh. Saubhagya Aggarwal, Adv. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.R. Singh, CIT, DR

Section 153A

Inventurus Knowledge Services P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed

ITA 5922/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2009-10 Inventurus Knowledge Services V. Income Tax Officer Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(1), C/O. Seren Properties Pvt. Ltd. 525, Aaykar Bhavan, (Sez), Unit No. 204, Build No. 5, M.K. Road, Mindspace Airoli Camp, Plot No. Mumbai - 400 020. 3, Gat No. 95, Kalwa Trans, Thane Creek, Midc Industrial Area, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 708. Pan/Gir No. Aabck4601P

…this effect but actual disallowance has been made by treating the impugned amount as contingent liability. 47. Now, we will consider the issue with reference to Accounting Standard -11 (AS-11). The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chellapali Sugar Mills, 98 ITR 167 and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Woodward Governor of India P. Ltd.(supra)observed that the accounting standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India required that accounting policies must be governed by the principle of prudence. Accounting Standards are prepared by ICAI keeping in view of the principle of prud…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Sunil Batra, New Delhi

ITA 3644/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sujit Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sudhir S Silwal, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…with his (assessee) father Shri Damodar Das Batra, who has also 1/3rd share in the property and thereby made addition of Rs.11,33,524 to the income of assessee. 9.2 Ld. CIT(A) by erroneously relying upon the judgement cited as CIT Vs Hindustan Petroleum Ltd., 98 ITR 167 (S.C.) and CIT Vs Mithlesh Kumari, 92 ITR 09 extended the relief of interest paid by the assessee on the borrowed loan of Rs.35,00,000/- used for the purchase of property in question by adding the same to the cost of acquisition, which is not permissible under law and the judgements cited as Hindustan Petroleum Ltd. and Mithlesh Kumari (supra) are…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat Hotels Limited

The appeal is disposed of

ITA-62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015

Section 36Section 43(1)

…iture, the payment of 2015:DHC:6084-DB ITA No.62 of 2007 Page 5 of 9 interest on the loans. After discussing the decisions of the Supreme Court in India Cements Ltd. v. CIT (1966) 60 ITR 52 and Challapalli Sugars Ltd. v. CIT (1975) 98 ITR 167, the Court summarised the legal position as follows: “The upshot of the aforesaid decisions as applied by the Tribunal in instant case is that: (i) a loan taken or capital borrowed is, by itself, not a capital asset, nor does it give an advantage of an enduring nature; (ii) as long as a loan was taken or capital was borrowed for the pu…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat Hotels Limited

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015

Section 36Section 43(1)