CIT v. Fort Gloster Industries (P.) Ltd.

79 ITR 48High Court1971#16120 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 24(b)Section 48Section 55

Judgments citing CIT v. Fort Gloster Industries (P.) Ltd.

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Neville Tuli, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 3203/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Porus Kaka, Ld. Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Preetam kumar Turerao, Ld. SR. AR
Section 24Section 250Section 55

…ed or laid out for the purpose of acquiring the depreciable assets.” 8.10 The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has also considered the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. (1971) 79 ITR 48 (Cal.) and ultimately held that the interest amount of Rs.16,878/- towards the actual cost of the land, was rightly added by the Tribunal. For completeness and ready reference, the observation made and conclusion drawn by the Hon’ble High Court is reproduced herein below: “The Assessee had placed an order with a British concern for the purchase of…

Shri Ramesh Trikamlal Padhiyar, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 902/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2013-14 Shri Ramesh Trikamlal Padhiyar, The Dy. Commissioner Of 19, Tulsivan Co-Op. Society, Vs Income-Tax, Jivan Park, Vejalpur Road, Circle – 3 (3), Ahmedabad-380051 Ahmedabad [Pan : Ackpp 6965 H] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.F. Jain, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 17/03/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/03/2020

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dileep Kumar, Sr DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…t interest paid on borrowings used for purchase of land had to be taken as part of actual cost of purchase of land. The Hon'ble High Court had followed the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Fort Gloster Industries (P.) Ltd. (1971) 79 ITR 48(Cal.) in which it was held that the interest paid on the borrowings had to be taken as part of the actual cost of plant and machinery. In holding so, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta had followed the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Habib Hussein vs. CIT (1963) (48 ITR 859) in which it was held as under :- "The dictionary m…

Shri Rameshkumar Trikamlal Padhiyar, Ahmedabad vs. The Jt.CIT, Circle-7, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 322/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.322/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2010-11 Shri Rameshkumar Trikamlal Padhiyar Vs. Jcit, Cir.7 B-604, Prayag Apts., Ahmedabad. Opp: Nirma Vihar School Bodakdev Ahmedabad 380 054. Pan : Ackpp 6965 H

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kannan, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 55Section 55(2)

…t interest paid on borrowings used for purchase of land had to be taken as part of actual cost of purchase of land. The Hon'ble High Court had followed the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Fort Gloster Industries (P.) Ltd. (1971) 79 ITR 48(Cal.) in which it was held that the interest paid on the borrowings had to be taken as part of the actual cost of plant and machinery. In holding so, the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta had followed the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Habib Hussein vs. CIT (1963) (48 ITR 859) in which it was held as under :- 9 "The dictionary…

Smt. Amita Narang, Delhi vs. The Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jammu

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 385/ASR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 385/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. K. R. Jain (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 45Section 48

…capital cost and, accordingly, deducted in computing the capital gain on its’ transfer. Guarantee commission paid to a bank for acquiring a capital asset was accordingly held as a part of it’s cost of acquisition in CIT v. Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. [1971] 79 ITR 48 (Cal). Any cost 4 Amita Narang v. Dy. CIT incurred for holding a capital asset, i.e., after its’ acquisition, or for its’ maintenance, would, accordingly, not stand to be allowed. This, in fact, is also the ratio of the decision in Mithilesh Kumari (supra), the relevant part, to reproduce verbatim, reads as under: (pg. 14 of the Reports) ‘It wou…

ACIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Flamboyawer Finance P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed and that the CO of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3388/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253(5)Section 55

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “D” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3388/Mum/2016 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Asst. Commissioner of M/s Flamboyawer Finace Income Tax-9(3)(2), 418, Pvt. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, 4 th Floor, FP, 145 Ram Mandir Road, Vs. M.K. Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 057 (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) PAN No. AAACF0545L P`a%yaaxaop saM./ Cross Objection No. No. 03/Mum/2018 (Arising in ITA No. 3388/Mum/2016 for AY 2…

Hgp Community Private Limited Successor to Alpha Associates, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-12(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5081/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Hgp Community Pvt. Income Tax Officer, Ltd.,514, Dalamal Word 3(1)(4), Room No Vs. Towers, 211, F P J 666, Aayakar Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai. Mumbai-400021 Pan No. Aaafa4103H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Chetan A. Karia, Ar Revenue By : Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/11/2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 26/02/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Chetan A. Karia, ARFor Respondent: Mr. M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 24

…Ltd v CIT [1975] 98 ITR 167 (SC) has held that interest on amount borrowed for acquiring and installing machinery for the period prior to commencement of production, forms part of actual cost. It has also been held in CIT v Fort Gloster Industries Ltd [1971] 79 ITR 48 (Cal) that expenses on registration, stamp duty, insurance, guarantee commission necessary for acquisition of a depreciable asset shall form part of the actual cost. HGP Community Pvt. Ltd. 10 Companies generally must capitalize interest costs associated with acquiring or constructing an asset that requires a long period of time to get ready for i…