How many judgments cite CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd.?

30 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd. (323 ITR 490), spanning 2015 to 2025.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 112(1), Section 115JAA.

CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd.

323 ITR 490High Court2010#3957 most cited

What is CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd. authority for?

Notional income from interest-free loans or deposits is not taxable under the Income Tax Act in the absence of a specific provision allowing for such taxation.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd. · notional income · interest free loans · interest free deposits · taxable income · Income Tax Act · specific provision

Also reported as

168 Taxmann 59

Sections most often in play

Section 1961 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 112(1)Section 115JAA Section 133(6)Section 133A

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

interest on interest section 23 previous year company business section 143 interest total income person section 14 section 143(3)india

Judgments citing CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd.

Agni Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known As : Agni Commex LLP), Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5083/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri J. Sravanan, DR

Section 1Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(b)

…clared by the assessee. 5. Before us, the learned counsel of the assessee relies on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom), judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Asian Hotels Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 490 (Del), and the order of the ITAT “H” Bench, Mumbai in the case of the assessee for the A.Y. 2004-05 (ITA No. 4591/Mum/2007). 6. Per contra the learned DR relies on the order passed by the learned CIT(A) upholding the addition @ 10% of security deposit made by the AO to the ALV declared by the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and…

Mrs. Rashmi Dhariwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 11 and 12 of the appeal of the assessee are allowed accordingly

ITA 2900/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirashmi Dhariwal, Vs. Acit, Aashray Farms, Sub Po, Circle-23(1), Sawan Public School, Bhatti New Delhi Mines, Asola Village, New Delhi Pan:Aappd9702P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sr. FR Meena, Sr. DR

Section 23

…Rashmi Dhariwal V ACIT ITA 2900/Del/2014 2008- 2009 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rashmi Dhariwal, Vs. ACIT, Aashray Farms, Sub PO, Circle-23(1), Sawan Public School, Bhatti New Delhi Mines, Asola Village, New Delhi PAN:AAPPD9702P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv Sh. Ashish Chadha, CA Revenue by: Sr. FR Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06/04/2017 Date of pronouncement 10/04/2017 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order…

Anudeep Enterprises P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 3(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1215/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G S Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year : 2006-07 Anudeep Enterprises P Ltd Ito Ward 3(1)(1), 801, Shanudeep, Mumbai Vs. 10 Altamount Road, Mumbai- 400 026 Pan Aaaca1338G (Appellant) Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P J PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…y be placed by tenant with the landlord as a part of the terms and conditions of letting out of such a property. In fact, the aforesaid proposition has been specifically approved by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Asian Hotels Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 490 and it has also been referred with approval by 6 M/s. Anudeep Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). The following discussion by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court is relevant in this context : “We approve the aforesaid view of the Division Bench of this court and operative words in section…

DCIT 20(2), Mumbai vs. Jagshi Chheda, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2012/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2012/Mum/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Sameer G. DalalFor Respondent: Shri G. Navitha Kumar

…l income declared by the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by following his decision rendered for A.Y. 2009-10. In this regard, the ld. CIT(A) placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Asian Hotel Ltd. 323 ITR 490. ITA 2012/Mum/2015 5 11. At the time of hearing, it was brought to our notice that an identical addition made by the A.O. in A.Y. 2009-10 has since been deleted by the Tribunal. 12. We have gone through the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal for A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 4960/Mum/2010 dated 24th June, 2016 and noticed that an…

DCIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. Parinee Realty P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 6215/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)

…34 ITR 209(Cal)  East India Pharmaceutical. Works Ltd vs. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 627  S.A.Builders vs. CIT(A) (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs Banswara Fabrics Ltd (2004) 267 ITR 398 (Raj)  UCO Bank vs CIT (1999) 237 ITR 889 (SC)  CIT vs Asian Hotels Ltd (2010) 323 ITR 490 (Delhi) 5.3.2. I find merit in the submission of the appellant that the no additions can be made on Notional income on the basis that the income should have been earned by the appellant. The appellant is not obliged to charge interest at a particular rate and no addition can be made on the basis that such interest was not charged. This is well se…

DCIT Cen Cir 13, Mumbai vs. Parinee Realty P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue and Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 6214/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

Section 143(3)

ACIT 17(2), Mumbai vs. Jagshi J Chheda, Mumbai

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6854/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)

…cepted. Even in the case where rent charged is lower, the provisions relating to computation of property does not permit addition of notional interest to the Income from House Property. The assessee has relied upon following judgments: CIT vs Asian Hotels Ltd 323 ITR 490 (Delhi- FB) 1. 2. Trivoli Investments & Trading CO Ltd ITA No 2808/2809/Mum/1996 dated 13.4.2011 3. CIT vs J.K. Investors (Bombay) Ltd 248 ITR 723 (Bom) 4. M. V. Sonavala vs. CIT 177 ITR 246 (Bom.) 5. CIT vs. Prabhabati Bansali 141 ITR 419 (Cal.) 6. Indersons Leathers Pvt Ltd vs AddI CIT 295 ITR 295 (AT- Amritsar) 7. CIT vs. Satya Co. Ltd. 140 CT…

Jagshi J. Chheda, Mumbai vs. A.C.I.T. Circle - 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, all of the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6733/MUM/2011[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2008-09

Section 143(3)

Vishwanath Acharaya, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 11(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7976/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 7976/Mum/2011 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08)

For Respondent: Shri B. Yadagiri

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…r, by no stretch of imagination, the notional interest on the interest free security can be taken as determinative factor to arrive at a "fair rent". The Provisions of section 23(1)(a) do not mandate this. The Division Bench in CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 490 (Delhi), thus, rightly observed that in a taxing statute it would be unsafe for the Court to go beyond the letter of the law and try to read into the provision more than what is already provided for. We may also record that even the Bombay High Court in the case ofCIT v. J.K. Investors (Bombay) Ltd. [2001] 248 ITR 723 categorically rejected the f…

DCIT Cen Cir 23, Mumbai vs. Rajendra Barot, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2961/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Lalit Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & AnujFor Respondent: Mrs Rupender Brar, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 23(1)(a)

…ide ITA No.7778/Mum/2010, dated 26.4.2013. 2. M/s. Gagan Trading Co. Ltd vs. ITO in ITA No.4088/Mum/2010 (AY 2006-07) dated 12.10.2012. 3. M/s. Gagan Trading Co. Ltd vs. ITO in ITA No.5288/Mum/2012 (AY 2009-2010), dated 29.7.2015. 4. CIT vs. Asian Hotels Ltd [323 ITR 490 (Del)] 20. Ld Counsel for the assessee also distinguished the decisions relied on by the Ld DR in the written submissions made by him. The written submissions made by the Ld Counsel for the assessee are as follows: “It is reiterated that the Assessing Officer has made addition on account of notional interest on interest free refundable security d…