CIT v. Amritaben R. Shah

238 ITR 777High Court1999#3171 most cited

What is CIT v. Amritaben R. Shah authority for?

Expenditure incurred to acquire controlling interest in a company, rather than to earn dividend income, is not allowable as a deduction under section 57(iii) as it is in the nature of capital expenditure.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Amritaben R. Shah · 238 ITR 777 · Section 57(iii) · Section 36(1)(iii) · revenue expenditure · capital expenditure · controlling interest · dividend income · interest expenditure · disallowance of interest

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 36(1)(iii)Section 57(iii)Section 115JBSection 1961: Section 10(34)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 36(1)(iii)revenue expenditurecapital expendituresection 36(1)section 36section 115jbsection 14aescapement of incomesection 37section 37(1)draft assessment order

Judgments citing CIT v. Amritaben R. Shah

Resource Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 8(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5782/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Resource Realty P. Ltd Dcit- Circle 8(3), 4Th Floor, Hdil Tower, बिधम/ R. No. 204, Aaykar Bhawan Anant Kanekar Marg, M.K Road, Vs. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbaii-400 703 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aaecr0433R (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Virag Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh K. Rai, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 57

…. 2011-12 15 Resource Realty Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT and stressing on the requirement that the expenditure should have been laid out or incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning of the income, had in the case of CIT Vs. Amritaben R. Shah (1999) 238 ITR 777 (Bom), observed that as interest on loan taken for purchasing shares for acquiring controlling interest in a company could not be held to be an expenditure incurred wholly or exclusively for earning income from dividend and deduction under s. 57(iii), therefore, the same was not allowable as an expenditure. We further find that the Hon’ble Apex C…

Shree Mangal Associaties, Mumbai vs. JCIT RG 17(3)

In the result, the appeal for the AY 2013-14 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2341/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Aggarwal, ARFor Respondent: Mr. V. Justin, DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…nst the interest income taxed under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’. 6. Per contra the Ld. DR relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in V.P. Gopinathan (supra) and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Amritaben R. Shah (1999) 238 ITR 777 (Bom). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decision are given below. We begin with the decision in the case of V.P. Gopinathan (supra). In that case the assessee had put moneys into fixed deposit with a bank and had earned in the assessment year in question interest in the sum o…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Virat Investment and Merca

ITA/37/2005HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…expenditure ultimately was to retain control of the 28% share holding and in that sense it had to be treated on the capital side. Learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Amritaben R. Shah, (1999) 238 ITR 777 (Bom) and submits that under similar circumstances where the Revenue had to deal with interest on loans borrowings by the assessee for acquiring shares with the intention to retain or acquire control, the Court had categorically ruled that the expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4…

Commissioner of Income Tax VI vs. M/S Virat Investment & Mercant

ITA/636/2004HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…expenditure ultimately was to retain control of the 28% share holding and in that sense it had to be treated on the capital side. Learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Amritaben R. Shah, (1999) 238 ITR 777 (Bom) and submits that under similar circumstances where the Revenue had to deal with interest on loans borrowings by the assessee for acquiring shares with the intention to retain or acquire control, the Court had categorically ruled that the expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4…

Commissioner of Income Tax VI vs. M/S Virat Investment & Mercant

ITA/709/2004HC Delhi19 Jan 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 143Section 57

…expenditure ultimately was to retain control of the 28% share holding and in that sense it had to be treated on the capital side. Learned counsel relies upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Amritaben R. Shah, (1999) 238 ITR 777 (Bom) and submits that under similar circumstances where the Revenue had to deal with interest on loans borrowings by the assessee for acquiring shares with the intention to retain or acquire control, the Court had categorically ruled that the expenditure lay properly in the capital side and, ITA Nos.709/2004, 37/2005 & 636/2004 Page 4…

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2153/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2151 & 2153/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09)

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…tilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) CIT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 (vi) CIT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 fTR 653 (vii) CIT v. Amritaben Shah - 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. fTO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)" Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 47,22,282/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

Narpat Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2151/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 2151 & 2153/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06 & 2008-09)

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…tilizers Co. Ltd. (2013) 215 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) CIT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 (vi) CIT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 fTR 653 (vii) CIT v. Amritaben Shah - 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. fTO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)" Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 47,22,282/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

M/S. Tata Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 4894/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

Section 10ASection 115JSection 14ASection 36

…ess activities. In respect of contention of the assessee that the dividend income was incidental to the business activity of the assessee, the AO rejected it by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Amritaben R. Shah 238 ITR 777 and M/s. Macintosh Finance Pvt. Ltd. of Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai ‘F’ Bench. The AO also rejected the alternative contention of assessee that dividend was 6 received on the total value of investment of Rs.93.73 crores, while there was no dividend received on investment of Rs.1689 crores and therefore, interest disallowances should be restricted for th…

Film Logic India P.Latd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD-1) Cen RG 7, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 1007/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Film Logic India Pvt. Ltd. Acit (Osd-1) 16 G, Laxmi Industrial Estate Central Range 7 Vs. Link Road, Andheri (W) Mumbai Mumbai 400053 Pan - Aaacf5879M Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…annot be allowed u/s.37(1). No explanation/justification has been provided by the appellant to state as to how these expenses are attributable to earning of the income from sale of script and are allowable u/s.57(iii). In the case of CIT vs. Arrtritaben Shah [238 ITR 777] the Hon'ble Bombay High Court have held that u/s.57(iii), expenses are allowable only when they are made exclusively for earning the income under the head. In view of these facts, the disallowance of these expenses made by the AO is justified. However, no income can be earned without incurring some expenditure which has to be allowed u/s.57(iii)…

Sameta Exports P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 1(3), Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4229/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2004-05 M/S Sameta Exports Pvt. Acit, Ltd. Circle-1(3), बनाम/ 4Th Floor, N.K. Mehta Room No.540/564, Vs. International House, 178, 5Th Floor Backbay Reclamation, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aarcs4409H (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 68

…y and the ld. Assessing Officer is directed to examine the claim of the assessee and then decide in accordance with law. The ld. Assessing Officer may consider the decision from Hon’ble Apex Court in S.A. Builders Ltd. 288 ITR 1 (SC), CIT vs Amritaben R. Shah 238 ITR 777, along with other cases, if any. This appeal of the Revenue is also allowed for statistical purposes. 4. Now, we shall take up the appeal of Assessment year 2006-07 (ITA No.4251/Mum/2010), wherein, issue of deleting the disallowance of interest of Rs.1,44,33,383/-, being the interest on borrowed funds advanced to sister concern for acquiring con…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3195/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…5 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3194/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…5 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3193/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…5 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

DCIT Cen Cir 23 Cen RG 7, Mumbai vs. Rasesh B.Kanakia, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3192/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 57

…5 Taxman 616 (Gujarat) (iv) Consolidated Fibres & Chemicals Ltd. v. ClT - 273 ITR 353 (Cal.) (v) ClT, West Bengal-3 v. Rajan Prasad Moody - 115 ITR 516 ITA 3192-3196/Mum/14 10 (vi) ClT v. Sujani Textile Pvt. Ltd. - 151 ITR 653 (vii) ClT v. Amritaben Shah – 238 ITR 777 (Del.) (viii) ClT v. Neo Poly Pack Pvt. Ltd. - 245 ITR 492 (ix) Parshuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO - 106 ITR 1 (SC)” Thus, the assessee contended that the addition of Rs. 78,51,111/- made by the AO to the income of the assessee needs to be deleted on account of consistency as no new material fact has come on record. The CIT(A) after consid…

M/S. Briggs Trading Company Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The DCIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed

ITA 4683/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3723/Mum/2005 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2001-02) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3121/Mum/2006 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4683/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4681/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…o be made even if the shares are held as stock in trade. He further submitted that the interest paid to purchase shares is required to be disallowed as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Amirtaben R Shah (1999) (238 ITR 777). 11. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of DCIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd (2008)(298 ITR 194) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court 7 ITA No.3723-/M/2005,3121/M/06, 4681/M/07 and 4683/Mum/2007 rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Phil Corporation Ltd & Anr (2011)(244 CTR…

The ACIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Briggs Trading Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed

ITA 4681/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3723/Mum/2005 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2001-02) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3121/Mum/2006 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4683/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4681/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…o be made even if the shares are held as stock in trade. He further submitted that the interest paid to purchase shares is required to be disallowed as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Amirtaben R Shah (1999) (238 ITR 777). 11. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of DCIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd (2008)(298 ITR 194) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court 7 ITA No.3723-/M/2005,3121/M/06, 4681/M/07 and 4683/Mum/2007 rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Phil Corporation Ltd & Anr (2011)(244 CTR…

M/S. Briggs Trading Co. P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir. - 6(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as partly allowed and the appeal of the revenue is treated as allowed

ITA 3723/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2016AY 2001-2002

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Pawan Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3723/Mum/2005 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2001-02) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3121/Mum/2006 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2002-03) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4683/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 135, Continental Bldg, -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Worli, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4681/Mum/2007 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2003-04) बनाम/ Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Briggs Trading Co.Pvt.Ltd., 135, Continental Bldg, Tax -6(1), Vs. Dr.Annie Besant Road, Room No.506, 5Th Floor, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400018 Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…o be made even if the shares are held as stock in trade. He further submitted that the interest paid to purchase shares is required to be disallowed as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Amirtaben R Shah (1999) (238 ITR 777). 11. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of DCIT Vs. Core Health Care Ltd (2008)(298 ITR 194) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court 7 ITA No.3723-/M/2005,3121/M/06, 4681/M/07 and 4683/Mum/2007 rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Phil Corporation Ltd & Anr (2011)(244 CTR…