CIT v. Canara Bank

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. State Bank Of India, Dcit, Financial Reporting & Circle -2(2), Taxation Dept., Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Office Of The Dcit-2(2), M/S. State Bank Of India, R.No.545, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Accounts & Compliance M.K. Road, Dept., Vs. 14Th Floor, Mumbai- 400 020 Madam Cama Rd., Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ank of India (iii) CIT v. Federal Bank Ltd. (301 ITR 188) (Ker) (iv) Housing Development and Finance Corporation (98 ITD 319) (Mum); (v) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (74 ITD 203) (Jaipur); (vi) Punjab & Sind Bank (239 ITR 343) (Del); (vii) Canara Bank (195 ITR 66) (Kar). (viii) The CIT(A) has also upheld in earlier years, that interest on securities is to be taxed on due basis. 8.8 Accordingly, the appellant's income stands enhanced by amount of Rs. 421.65.56,397/- following the charging of interest on due basis on specified dates in the security. 8.9 A perusal of the aforesaid facts shows that the amou…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. State Bank Of India, Dcit, Financial Reporting & Circle -2(2), Taxation Dept., Mumbai 3Rd Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Office Of The Dcit-2(2), M/S. State Bank Of India, R.No.545, Central Office, Aayakar Bhavan, Accounts & Compliance M.K. Road, Dept., Vs. 14Th Floor, Mumbai- 400 020 Madam Cama Rd., Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ank of India (iii) CIT v. Federal Bank Ltd. (301 ITR 188) (Ker) (iv) Housing Development and Finance Corporation (98 ITD 319) (Mum); (v) State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (74 ITD 203) (Jaipur); (vi) Punjab & Sind Bank (239 ITR 343) (Del); (vii) Canara Bank (195 ITR 66) (Kar). (viii) The CIT(A) has also upheld in earlier years, that interest on securities is to be taxed on due basis. 8.8 Accordingly, the appellant's income stands enhanced by amount of Rs. 421.65.56,397/- following the charging of interest on due basis on specified dates in the security. 8.9 A perusal of the aforesaid facts shows that the amou…

JT. CIT -(OSD)-2(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm Central Bank Of India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 4Th Floor, Of Income Tax – 2(1) Chandermukhi Building Aayakar Bhavan Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc2498P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Jt. Cit (Osd)-2(1)(2) Vs. Central Bank Of India R.No.561, 5Th Floor 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road Chandermukhi Building Mumbai – 400 020 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaacc2498P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue By Shri V. Sreekar Date Of Hearing 16/01/2020 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh (A.M): These Cross Appeals In Ita Nos.3739/Mum/2018 & 3673/Mum/2018 For A.Y.2012-13 Arises Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)-3/Dcit2(1) It- 44/Tr.4/16-17 Dated 30/01/2018 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 25/03/2014 By The Ld. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax -2(1), Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: "18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest and only in such a situation Section 18 is attracted and that the securit…

ACIT 2(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhcentral Bank Of India D C I T - 2(1)(2) 4Th Floor, Chandermukhi Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Nariman Point M.K. Road Mumbai 400021 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacc2498P Appellant Respondent Ac I T - 2(1)(2) Central Bank Of India Room No. 562, 5Th Floor 4Th Floor, Chandermukhi Bldg. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacc2498P Appellant Respondent

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhcentral Bank Of India D C I T - 2(1)(2) 4Th Floor, Chandermukhi Bldg. Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Nariman Point M.K. Road Mumbai 400021 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacc2498P Appellant Respondent Ac I T - 2(1)(2) Central Bank Of India Room No. 562, 5Th Floor 4Th Floor, Chandermukhi Bldg. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacc2498P Appellant Respondent

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

DCIT 2(1), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

DCIT 2(1), MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

…Suisse First Boston (Cyprus )ltd (supra) and find that the identical issue has been decided by holding that the said interest is not liable to tax qua the broken period. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced below: “18. In CIT v. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66/61 Taxman 79 another Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court followed the above judgments. The High Court construed the last sentence quoted above from the judgment of the Supreme Court emphasised by us as under :- "The last sentence conveys the idea that actually the income fructifies to the assessee only when the securities yield the interest…

MAHINDRA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INVESTMENT P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

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

…ncome had not accrued in-as-much as the option had not been exercised, i.e., accrued and shall only be so on the (sale) transfer of shares. Reliance stands placed by it on E. D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27 (SC) and CIT vs. Canara Bank [1992] 195 ITR 66 (Kar). In view of the Revenue, the income being defined to arise on the basis of time, i.e., as a linear function of and by elapse of time, accrues to the assessee on time basis and, accordingly, working out that accrued for the current year, reflected by an increase in the option price during the year, brought it to tax. Reliance is placed by it…