CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.

236 ITR 315Supreme Court of India1999#200 most cited

What is CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. authority for?

Interest earned during the pre-commencement period of a project, on advances made to contractors or on unutilized borrowed funds, if inextricably linked to the setting up of the plant, constitutes a capital receipt. Such interest is not taxable as income but can be reduced from the capital work-in-progress.

370

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. · 236 ITR 315 · pre-commencement interest · capital receipt · income from other sources · unutilized borrowed funds · advances to contractors · capital work-in-progress · Section 56 · Section 28 · setting up of plant

Also reported as

102 Taxmann 94

Sections most often in play

Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 199Section 250Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 32Section 194A

Issues it is cited on

section 32(1)section 22section 57section 56section 32profits and gains of business or professionadvance taxsection 37(1)revenue expenditureincome from other sourcessection 28section 37

Judgments citing CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd.

M/S. Tridoss Laboratories Private Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent. Cir. - 14, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1462/MUM/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2002-03
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…s of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of E.D. Sassoon & Co. Ltd., vs. CIT reported in 26 ITR 27; CIT vs. Shoorji Vallabhdas& Co., reported in 46 ITR 144; Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., vs. CIT reported in 225 ITR 746; CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., reported in 236 ITR 315; CIT vs. Sarabhai Holdings Pvt. Ltd., reported in 307 ITR 89, among others. 3.5. The assessee also, on without prejudice basis, submitted that in any case out of the total interest payment of Rs.6.52 Crores, a sum of Rs.1.93 Crores was paid as interest on term loans which could not have been used for granting interest free loans or for any other…

ACIT Circle-14(1), New Delhi vs. Kanti Bijlee Utpadan Nigam Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5586/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2013-14

…as erred in holding that the interest of Rs.1,54,00,667/- recovered from contractors is inextricably linked to the development / setting up of the Power plant by wrongly relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315. The facts and ratio of these case laws is not applicable to this case. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that other receipts of Rs.32,63,954/- recovered from contractors is inextricably linked to the development / setting up of the Power plant. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that miscellaneous income of Rs.18,05,630/- out of total…

Teesta Urja Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-25(2), New Delhi

In the result, for statistical purposes, this appeal is

ITA 7225/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 57

…stances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated, inter alia, that the appellant's case in respect of this particular item of interest was based on the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315) and being such, it was not open to him to uphold the impugned addition on the ground that the same was taxable in terms of the decision of the Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemcals and Fertilizers Ltd.’s case (227 ITR 172). 2.2) That the order passed by the Id. CIT(A) is bad in law as he has misinterpreted all the case laws cited by the app…

Mellona Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward- 3 (2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1408/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Mellona Developers Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 3(2)(2) Room No. 673A, Aayakar Bhavan 514, Dalamal Towers, 211 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 F.P.J. Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aafcm3780K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal Department By : Shri Mahita Nair

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Mahita Nair
Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)

…ixed deposits, the income earned in the form of interest will be taxable under head ‘income from other sources’. The above ratio shows that the business was not commenced. 18. Further, we observe from the decision in the case of CIT v. Bokaro Steel Limited (236 ITR 315) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: - "During the relevant assessment years, the respondent-assessee had invested the amounts borrowed by it for the construction work which were not immediately required, in short-term deposits and earned 13 M/s. Mellona Developers Pvt. Ltd., interest. In any case, question is concluded by a decision of the…

Il&Fs Tamilnadu Power Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Company Circle - 2 92), Chennai

ITA 3217/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2018/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Vs. Company Ltd., Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Company Ltd., Vs. Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghunath, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri Raghunath, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…stands confirmed. Ground taken is dismissed. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 and CIT vs. Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243 ITR 2. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR stated that issue is covered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of 7 I.T.A. Nos.2018/Chny/2019 & ITA Nos.1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., vs. CIT, 227 ITR 172. The ld.Senior DR also file…

JCIT (OSD) Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai vs. Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Chennai

ITA 2018/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2018/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Vs. Company Ltd., Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Company Ltd., Vs. Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghunath, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri Raghunath, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…stands confirmed. Ground taken is dismissed. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 and CIT vs. Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243 ITR 2. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR stated that issue is covered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of 7 I.T.A. Nos.2018/Chny/2019 & ITA Nos.1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., vs. CIT, 227 ITR 172. The ld.Senior DR also file…

Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

ITA 1990/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2018/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Vs. Company Ltd., Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Company Ltd., Vs. Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghunath, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri Raghunath, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…stands confirmed. Ground taken is dismissed. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 and CIT vs. Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243 ITR 2. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR stated that issue is covered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of 7 I.T.A. Nos.2018/Chny/2019 & ITA Nos.1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., vs. CIT, 227 ITR 172. The ld.Senior DR also file…

Il & Fs Tamil Nadu Power Company Limited, Chennai vs. JCIT Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

ITA 1989/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:2018/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Vs. Company Ltd., Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.:1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Jcit (Osd), Il & Fs Tamilnadu Power Corporate Circle -2(2), Company Ltd., Vs. Chennai – 34. New No.2, (Old No.21), 4Th Floor, Kpr Tower, 1St Street, Subba Rao Avenue, College Road, Chennai – 600 006. Pan: Aabcf 1176A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Raghunath, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.08.2022

For Appellant: Shri Raghunath, CAFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…stands confirmed. Ground taken is dismissed. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR 315 and CIT vs. Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills, [2000] 243 ITR 2. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Senior DR stated that issue is covered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of 7 I.T.A. Nos.2018/Chny/2019 & ITA Nos.1989, 1990 & 3217/Chny/2019 Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd., vs. CIT, 227 ITR 172. The ld.Senior DR also file…

Teh DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. Metro Link Express for Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad Mega Co. Ltd, Gandhinagar

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and Cross

ITA 1754/AHD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Jul 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, &For Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…rplus’ and then by virtue of that circumstances they are invested in fixed deposits the income earned in the form of interest will be taxable under the head ‘Income from other sources”. 5.4. The Hon’ble supreme Court of India in the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315 held that, if income is earned, whether by way of interest or in any other manner on funds which are otherwise ‘inextricably linked’ to the setting up of the plant, such income is required to be capitalized to be set off against pre-operative expenses. The test, therefore is whether the activity which is taken up for setting up of the business an…

Courtyard Real Estate Pvt. Ltd, `Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent. Cir -5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is Allowed

ITA 2312/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Abyt Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S Courtyard Real Estate Private Limited 1St Floor, Windsor, Cst Road, Kalina, Santacruz East Mumbai-400098 Pan: Aadcr0870K ...... Appellant Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle 5(4), Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 ..…Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Jitendra Jain, Ca Respondent By : Shri Shyam Joshi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/07/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-53, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As Cit (A)] Vide Order Dated 26.10.2021 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. The Solitary Issue Disputed In Appeal Is As Under: “1. The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Action Of Ao In Treating The Interest Income Earned On Fixed Deposits (Fd) Of Rs. 60,49,527/- As “Income From Other Sources” For The Year As Against Reducing The Same From The Total Cost Of Work In Progress. 2. The Appellant Submits That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case The Interest Income Earned On Fd Of Rs. 60,49,527/- Reduces The Interest Cost On Funds Borrowed For The Project & Thus Has Been Rightly Reduced From The Cost Of Project. 3. Your Appellant Craves Leave To Add, To Alter, Or To Amend The Aforesaid Grounds Of Appeal. 2 M/S Courtyard Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee-Company Is In The Business Of Real Estates Development & Construction. It Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay 2017- 18 On 30.3.2018 Declaring Income For The Year At Rs. 56,72,910/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Was Constructing A Residential Project At Pokhran Road No 2, Thane. It Was Following Percentage Completion Method (Pcm) Of Accounting For Revenue Recognition.

For Appellant: Shri. Jitendra Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shyam Joshi, Sr. DR

…om the total fund paid to the assessee and kept as FD in HDFC Bank. The term sheet entered into PFL was filed at page 47 – 71 of the paper book. In order to buttress the submission, the AR relied upon following judicial pronouncements:  Bokaro Steel Limited [236 ITR 315 SC]  CIT Vs. Karnal Co-Operative Sugar Mills Ltd [243 ITR 2 SC]  CIT Vs. Jaypee DSC Ventures Ltd [335 ITR 132](Delhi)  CIT Vs. Paramount Premises (P) Ltd [190 ITR 0259 (Bom HC) 6. The Ld. DR vehemently argued and relied upon the CIT(A)’s order. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the paper book filed by the assessee. The undisputed…

Hablis Hotels, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 1(3), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 1690/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.:1690/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year 2013 - 2014

For Appellant: Mr. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Ravindra T. Mishra, JCIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 57

…ajesh to the extent of Rs.58,33,333/- and claimed the same for deduction u/s.57 of the Act. We noted that this issue is covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bokaro Steel Limited reported in [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC); wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered the character of interest paid and received by the Assessee and held to be capitalized, both., i.e. interest paid as well as interest received by observing in paragraph No.7, as under: :: 4 :: I.T.A No.:1690/CHNY/2019 “7. The appellant, however, relied upon the decision of this Court in T…

Sai Siddhant Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC -5(4), Mumbai

In the result , all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2193/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)

…of the matter the ratio laid down by this Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172, will not be attracted. The more appropriate decision in the factual situation in the present case is in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC). The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.” 6.4. Similar views were expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bokaro Steel Ltd reported in 236 ITR 315 (SC) ; Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd vs CIT reported in 251 ITR 329 (SC); Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Co…

Sai Siddhant Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC-5(4), Mumbai

In the result , all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2192/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)

…of the matter the ratio laid down by this Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172, will not be attracted. The more appropriate decision in the factual situation in the present case is in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC). The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.” 6.4. Similar views were expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bokaro Steel Ltd reported in 236 ITR 315 (SC) ; Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd vs CIT reported in 251 ITR 329 (SC); Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Co…

M/S. Sai Siddhi Developers, Mumbai vs. DCIT -CC-5(40, Mumbai

In the result , all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2190/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)

…of the matter the ratio laid down by this Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172, will not be attracted. The more appropriate decision in the factual situation in the present case is in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC). The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.” 6.4. Similar views were expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bokaro Steel Ltd reported in 236 ITR 315 (SC) ; Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd vs CIT reported in 251 ITR 329 (SC); Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Co…

Shree Sai Consultants, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC-5(4), Mumbai

In the result , all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2188/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)

…of the matter the ratio laid down by this Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172, will not be attracted. The more appropriate decision in the factual situation in the present case is in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC). The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.” 6.4. Similar views were expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Bokaro Steel Ltd reported in 236 ITR 315 (SC) ; Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd vs CIT reported in 251 ITR 329 (SC); Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Co…

Dana India Technical Centre Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1 (2), Pune

ITA 437/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.437/Pun/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

…ings made by the assessee for 3 Dana India Technical Centre Private Ltd., purchasing fixed assets and keeping of such amount, for the time being, in the fixed deposits yielding interest income. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Plant (1999) 236 ITR 315 (SC) has held that interest and hire charges realized from contractor could not be taxed as ‘Income from other sources’. Such interest, being, intrinsically connected with construction activity would go to reduce the cost of construction. Similar view has been reiterated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Karnataka Power Corporation (20…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai vs. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2181/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Income Tax, Administrative Building, Chennai Metro Corporate Circle 1(2), Rail Depot, P.H. Road, Opp. To Daniel Chennai 600 034. Thomas School, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107. [Pan: Aadcc2233K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai Dated 14.05.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Common Ground Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Relates To Deletion Of Addition Made Towards Interest Income.

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 14Section 4

…ns of the assessee, distinguishing the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. 227 ITR 172 and by relying upon the subsequent decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315, Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. 243 ITR 2 and Karnataka Power Corporation 247 ITR 268, the ld. 6 I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/18 CIT(A) has observed that the claim of the assessee is reasonable and deserves to be accepted and accordingly held that the interest income is not taxable. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribun…

DCIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai vs. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2180/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Chennai Metro Rail Limited, Income Tax, Administrative Building, Chennai Metro Corporate Circle 1(2), Rail Depot, P.H. Road, Opp. To Daniel Chennai 600 034. Thomas School, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107. [Pan: Aadcc2233K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri M. Rajan, Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.05.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against The Common Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai Dated 14.05.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. Since Common Ground Involved, Both The Appeals Were Heard & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Relates To Deletion Of Addition Made Towards Interest Income.

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Section 14Section 4

…ns of the assessee, distinguishing the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. 227 ITR 172 and by relying upon the subsequent decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Bokaro Steel Ltd. 236 ITR 315, Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. 243 ITR 2 and Karnataka Power Corporation 247 ITR 268, the ld. 6 I.T.A. Nos.2180 & 2181/Chny/18 CIT(A) has observed that the claim of the assessee is reasonable and deserves to be accepted and accordingly held that the interest income is not taxable. 4. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribun…

DCIT Circle-12(1), New Delhi vs. Indian Synthetic Rubber Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4833/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Supreme Court & Matter Has Not Reached Finality?”

For Appellant: Shri P.N. Shastri, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla, Senior DR

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘H’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4833/Del./2019 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15) DCIT, Circle 12 (1), vs. Indian Synthetic Rubber Pvt. Ltd., 10th Floor, Core – 2, North Tower, New Delhi. Scope Minar, Laxmi Nagar District Centre, Delhi – 110 092. (PAN : AACCI3980J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri P.N. Shastri, CA REVENUE BY : Ms. Anupama Singla, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 09.06.2022 Date of Order : 22.06.2022 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal filed by the Rev…

DCIT, Corporate Circle -1(2), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Posco India Private Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue and cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 423/CTK/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack21 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2015-16 Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Vs. M/S. Posco India Pvt Ltd., M/S. Posco India Pvt Ltd., Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Ground Floor, Fortune Towers, Ground Floor, Fortune Towers, Zone-6, 6, Chandrasekharpur, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. No.Aadcp 6735 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) C.O.No.09/Ctk/2020 (In Ita No.423/Ctk/2019) (In Ita No.423/Ctk/2019) Assessment Year : 2015-16 M/S. Posco India Pvt Ltd., M/S. Posco India Pvt Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(2), Ground Floor, Fortune Towers, Ground Floor, Fortune Towers, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Zone-6, 6, Chandrasekharpur, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No.Aadcp 6735 B Pan/Gir No.Aadcp 6735 B (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra/Shri A.K.SabatFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT (
Section 250

…y expenditure was incurred for earning interest income, it could have been allowed under section 5? In the result, assessee's appeals were dismissed. P a g e 5 | 16 C.O.No.09/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2015-16 vii.) In the ease of CIT Vs. Bokaro Steel Ltd. (236 ITR 315), the assessee-company was in the business of manufacturing of steel. For the purpose of construction of the plant, the assessee company gave advances to its contractors and earned interest from such advances, which were adjusted against the charges payable to the contractors, thus utilizing the interest amount to reduce the cost of construction.…