CIT v. Autokast Ltd.

248 ITR 110Supreme Court of India2001#2893 most cited

What is CIT v. Autokast Ltd. authority for?

Interest earned on surplus funds deposited in short-term deposits is chargeable under section 56 as income from other sources. This interest cannot be treated as business income unless it is inextricably linked with the business operations.

41

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Autokast Ltd. · section 56 · interest on surplus funds · income from other sources · business income · short-term deposits · Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals

Also reported as

116 Taxmann 244

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 3Section 71

Issues it is cited on

section 276ccarry forward of lossesdeletion of penaltysection 57(iii)section 35dsection 70penalty proceedings initiatedsection 11(1)(a)section 244asection 11(1)section 35furnishing inaccurate particulars of income

Judgments citing CIT v. Autokast Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax-V N vs. Damanjit Singh

ITA/166/2000HC Delhi12 Jan 2007

…ns for business cannot be treated as business income but only as income from other sources. The decision in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilisers, which was rendered in the context of Sections 56 and 57, has been followed in CIT v. Auto Kast Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 110 (SC). Likewise, in CIT v. Dr. V.Gopinathan (2001) 248 ITR 449 (SC) interest on fixed deposits was held not to qualify for setting off against interest on loans borrowed. The other 2007:DHC:9-DB decisions on the same lines, in the context of Section 80HHC are CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 and Pandian Chemicals (2003) 262 ITR 278…