CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd.

243 ITR 2Supreme Court of India2000#822 most cited

What is CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. authority for?

Income earned from deposits or investments directly and inextricably linked to the acquisition of assets or the setting up of a business project during its construction period is incidental to the asset acquisition, reducing the project cost, or constitutes business receipts eligible for relevant deductions, rather than 'income from other sources'.

125

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills · 243 ITR 2 · income during construction · project cost reduction · funds linked to asset acquisition · business income · section 28(1) · section 80IA · section 80IAB · Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals distinguished

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 28(1)Section 80-IABSection 80IA(4)(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 112section 111section 114section 57(iii)furnishing inaccurate particulars of incomefurnishing inaccurate particularssection 57section 22section 56income from other sourcessection 271(1)section 37(1)

Judgments citing CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd.

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -5 vs. Jaypee Powergrid Ltd

ITA-397/2019HC Delhi30 Nov 2023

Bench: The Tribunal Was Whether The Interest Earned By The Respondent/Assessee From The Investment Made In Fixed Deposits, Out Of The Funds Received For Setting Up A Power Transmission System In The State Of Himachal Pradesh, Would Be Amenable To Tax Under The Head “Income From Other Sources”? 4. The Assessing Officer (Ao), Via The Assessment Order Dated Digitally Signed By:Atul Jain Signing Date:14.12.2023 15:33:37 Signature Not Verified

…set off the interest earned against the expenses incurred on public issue. 32.1 We may also note that the court cited in its judgment, Bokaro Steel Ltd.’s case and the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills Ltd., (2000) 243 ITR 2 (SC). 32.2 The following observations made in Shree Rama Multi Tech Ltd.’s case would be apposite and are set forth hereafter: “.....We are, therefore, of the opinion that interest earned was Digitally Signed By:ATUL JAIN Signing Date:14.12.2023 15:33:37 Signature Not Verified ITA 397/2019…

Power Grid Mithilanchal Transmission Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 19(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 68/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 194ASection 250

…ITA No.-68/Del/2023 Power Grid Mithilanchal Transmission Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE: SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No:- 68/Del/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Power Grid Mithilanchal CPC, Bengaluru, Transmission Limited, Vs. ITO, Ward 19(4), B-9, Qutub Institutional Area, Delhi. Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi- 110016. PAN No: AAECE4900E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Shri Aman Garg, CA Revenue by : Ms Harpreet Kaur, Sr. DR : 23.11.2023 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : 30.11.20…

Rkm Powergen Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 579/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…eat the entire interest ITA No.577 to 579/Chny/2022 income as ‘income from other sources’ and put the assessee to show- cause notice. 3.2 The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (243 ITR 2) as well as another decision in CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. (236 ITR 315). 3.3 However, rejecting the same and applying the ratio of decision in M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Ltd. (227 ITR 172), entire interest income of Rs.309.15 Lacs was brought to tax as ‘income from other sources’. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 During appellate proceedings, the ass…

Rkm Powergen Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1) Chennai, Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 578/CHNY/2022[AADCR0301B]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jul 2023

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…eat the entire interest ITA No.577 to 579/Chny/2022 income as ‘income from other sources’ and put the assessee to show- cause notice. 3.2 The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (243 ITR 2) as well as another decision in CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. (236 ITR 315). 3.3 However, rejecting the same and applying the ratio of decision in M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Ltd. (227 ITR 172), entire interest income of Rs.309.15 Lacs was brought to tax as ‘income from other sources’. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 During appellate proceedings, the ass…

Rkm Powergen Private Limited, Chennai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals stand dismissed

ITA 577/CHNY/2022[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jul 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri V. Ravichandran (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…eat the entire interest ITA No.577 to 579/Chny/2022 income as ‘income from other sources’ and put the assessee to show- cause notice. 3.2 The assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (243 ITR 2) as well as another decision in CIT vs. Bokaro Steels Ltd. (236 ITR 315). 3.3 However, rejecting the same and applying the ratio of decision in M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals Ltd. (227 ITR 172), entire interest income of Rs.309.15 Lacs was brought to tax as ‘income from other sources’. Appellate Proceedings 4.1 During appellate proceedings, the ass…

Picric Ltd vs. ITO Ward 14 (4)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with directions contained in para 22 above

ITA 4115/DEL/2007[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Apr 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Jain,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Chaudhary, CIT(DR)
Section 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 80H

…the assessee, the question whether the income accruing on the said deposits would constitute business income stands answered by the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bokaro Steel Ltd. (1999) 236 ITR 315 and Karnal Co-operation Sugar Mills Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 2. Both these decisions are in our view sufficient authority for the proposition that where the income in the nature of interest flows from deposits made by the assessee which deposits are in turn inextricably linked to the business of income from other sources. 14. In CIT vs. Hritnik Exports Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos. 219/2014 and 239/2014 decided on Nove…

M/S. Swelect Solar Energy Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 6 (4), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 93/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Feb 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: ShriN. Arjun Raj, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Jancy Elizabeth, JCIT
Section 143(3)

…eved, now assessee is in appeal before Tribunal. 4. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that this issue has been considered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 243 ITR 2 and Bokaro Steels Ltd., 236 ITR 315, wherein it is held that interest income has to be capitalized as the deposit of money was directly linked with the purpose of plant and machinery. The ld. Senior DR argued that the matter can be referred back to the file of the AO to ascertain the direct nexus of amount borrowed on which interest is paid and amo…

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

In the result, the present appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2191/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Jayant Bhatt & Jitali GandhiFor Respondent: Shri R.N. D‟Souza
Section 143(3)Section 68

…ated as recovery of part of the project cost and cannot be treated as income from other sources. We find that the ld. AR had rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd reported in 243 ITR 2 (SC) . The relevant operative portion of the judgement is reproduced hereunder:- "2. In the present case, the assessee had deposited money to open a letter of credit for the purchase of the machinery required for setting up its plant in terms of the assessee's agreement with the supplier. It was on the money so deposited that some interest has bee…

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai vs. Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2704/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…med exemption of this interest income to the tune of Rs.21.79 crores out of the total interest earned at Rs.23.86 crores. The assessee before AO pleaded that in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 243 ITR 2 and Bokaro Steels Ltd., 236 ITR 315, the interest income has been capitalized as the deposit of the money was directly linked with the purchase of plant & machinery. Hence, the income earned on such fixed deposits was instrumental to the acquisition of assets for setting up of plant & machinery and as such, the interest income could not be treated…

DCIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai vs. Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2703/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…med exemption of this interest income to the tune of Rs.21.79 crores out of the total interest earned at Rs.23.86 crores. The assessee before AO pleaded that in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 243 ITR 2 and Bokaro Steels Ltd., 236 ITR 315, the interest income has been capitalized as the deposit of the money was directly linked with the purchase of plant & machinery. Hence, the income earned on such fixed deposits was instrumental to the acquisition of assets for setting up of plant & machinery and as such, the interest income could not be treated…

Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2605/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…med exemption of this interest income to the tune of Rs.21.79 crores out of the total interest earned at Rs.23.86 crores. The assessee before AO pleaded that in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 243 ITR 2 and Bokaro Steels Ltd., 236 ITR 315, the interest income has been capitalized as the deposit of the money was directly linked with the purchase of plant & machinery. Hence, the income earned on such fixed deposits was instrumental to the acquisition of assets for setting up of plant & machinery and as such, the interest income could not be treated…

Nagarjuna Oil Corporation Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 4(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2604/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…med exemption of this interest income to the tune of Rs.21.79 crores out of the total interest earned at Rs.23.86 crores. The assessee before AO pleaded that in view of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnal Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 243 ITR 2 and Bokaro Steels Ltd., 236 ITR 315, the interest income has been capitalized as the deposit of the money was directly linked with the purchase of plant & machinery. Hence, the income earned on such fixed deposits was instrumental to the acquisition of assets for setting up of plant & machinery and as such, the interest income could not be treated…

Ibrox Real Estate Development Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 344/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojaria & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA
Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 57

…ts plant and machinery, such receipts will go to reduce the cost of its assets. These are receipts of a capital nature and cannot be taxed as income.” 17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Karnal Co- Operative Sugar Mills Ltd. reported in [2000] 243 ITR 2, held that, where the assessee deposited money to open a letter of credit for the purchase of the machinery required for setting up its plant., the interest earned from such deposit would be treated as capital receipt since it is inextricably linked with the purchase of machinery. The relevant extract reads as under; “In the present case, the asses…

Ibrox Real Estate Development Private Limited, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 343/BANG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojaria & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CA
Section 143(2)Section 234ASection 57

…ts plant and machinery, such receipts will go to reduce the cost of its assets. These are receipts of a capital nature and cannot be taxed as income.” 17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Karnal Co- Operative Sugar Mills Ltd. reported in [2000] 243 ITR 2, held that, where the assessee deposited money to open a letter of credit for the purchase of the machinery required for setting up its plant., the interest earned from such deposit would be treated as capital receipt since it is inextricably linked with the purchase of machinery. The relevant extract reads as under; “In the present case, the asses…

M/S.G.K.W.Ltd vs. Comnr.of Incometax

The appeal is disposed of in the

ITA/50/2006HC Orissa16 Aug 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH

Section 35ASection 56Section 57

…cals & Fertilizers Ltd., Madras v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras (1997) 6 SCC 117; Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar II, Patna v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 151 CTR (SC) 276 and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (2000) 243 ITR 2 (SC), this Court held that interest earned on short term deposits from the borrowed capital would be capital and not revenue in nature. Consequently, Question (b) is answered in the negative in favour of the Assessee and against the Department. 5. As far as Question (c) is concerned, reliance is placed by learned counsel for the Assessee on…

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

…e 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 filed written submissions consisting of 13 pages but the Revenue in i…

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

…e 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 filed written submissions consisting of 13 pages but the Revenue in i…

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

…e 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 filed written submissions consisting of 13 pages but the Revenue in i…

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

…e 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 filed written submissions consisting of 13 pages but the Revenue in i…

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

…ank. 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 facts of the present case are that the assessee is engaged in…