CIT v. Lok

308 ITR 356High Court2009#1744 most cited

What is CIT v. Lok authority for?

Interest earned by an assessee on temporary deposits of surplus funds, which are received as advances in a business activity and are inextricably linked to that business, is assessable as 'Profits and Gains from Business or Profession' rather than 'Income from Other Sources'.

65

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,459 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Lok Holdings · interest income classification · business income · income from other sources · temporary deposits · customer advances · funds inextricably linked to business · Section 40(b)(v) · Section 40A(ia) · Profits and Gains from Business or Profession

Also reported as

189 Taxmann 452

Sections most often in play

Section 119Section 142(1)Section 148Section 194ASection 263Section 36(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 293section 40a(i)section 10(5)section 44csection 32asection 74section 73section 42section 32(1)(iia)initial assessment yearsection 72vsv scheme

Judgments citing CIT v. Lok

DCIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Sea Princess Realty, Mumbai

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5169/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek VyasFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra

…peals) noticing the fact that identical issue arose in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2006–07, 2007–08 and 2008–09, wherein the first appellate authority following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Lok Holdings, [2009] 308 ITR 356 (Bom.), had decided the issue in favour of the assessee by holding that interest income earned is assessable 3 M/s. Sea Princess Realty under the head business income which was also confirmed by the Tribunal in assessment year 2007–08 and 2008–09, decided the issue in favour of the assessee by deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer…

DCIT 24(3), Mumbai vs. Gundecha Builders, Mumbai

In the result, Department’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 3906/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jan 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Shrikant Mamdeo

…h Court's decision in the case of CIT Vs Swani Spice Mills P. Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 288 (Born) (2001) 12 Taxmann.com 432 (Born) High Court's Order dt. 19.4.2010 after taking note of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's decision in the case of CIT Vs Lok Holdings Ltd 308 ITR 356 (Born). M/s. Gundecha Builders 12 18. Briefly stated the facts are, during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that interest income earned on fixed deposits and loans have been shown by the assessee under the head “Business”. The Assessing Officer being of the opinion that the income earned is not from any activity of adve…

Hiranandani Palace Gardens P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT (OSD) Cir 3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 4579/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Hiranandani Palace The Assistant Commissioner Of Gardens P. Ltd., Income Tax (Osd), 514 Dalamal Towers, 211 Fpj Circle -3(1), Vs. Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaccc 8862H (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Chetan Karia, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.12.2015

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Karia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Kumar Agarwal, D.R
Section 234B

…e Ld. AR in this respect has relied upon the various case laws including the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of “Swish Chandra & Co. vs. CIT” 234 ITR 70 (KAR) and decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT Vs. Lok Holdings” 308 ITR 356 (Bom.) and has contended that the said decisions are fully applicable on the facts of this case. The Ld. DR on the other hand has relied upon the findings of the lower authorities. 10. We find that in the facts and circumstances of the case in hand, the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT vs. Lok Holdings” (supra) is squar…

Tulip Shapes & Structures (P) Ltd, Mumbai vs. It WD 1(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1010/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Dec 2015AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia, Am Assessment Year: 2010-11 Tulip Shapes & Structures P. Ltd. The Ito Ward- 1 (3)(3), 6Th Floor, A Wing, Aaykar Bhawan, बनाम/ Universal Business Park, Room No. 528, 5Th Floor, Chandivali Farm Road, Mumbai – 400020. Vs. Off Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 4000072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aadct0329F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) :

For Respondent: Shri. V.S.Jadhav
Section 36Section 57

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA, AM Assessment Year: 2010-11 Tulip Shapes & Structures P. Ltd. The ITO Ward- 1 (3)(3), 6th Floor, A Wing, Aaykar Bhawan, बनाम/ Universal Business Park, Room No. 528, 5th Floor, Chandivali farm Road, Mumbai – 400020. Vs. Off Saki Vihar Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 4000072 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AADCT0329F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : Shri. Hitendra Bhandari : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. V.S.Jadhav सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 22/12/2015 Date of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 2…

Nathuram Ramnarayan P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2583/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआमकय अऩीर सं. / Ita No.2583/Mum./2011 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year : 2007–08) M/S. Nathuram Ramnarayan Pvt. Ltd. Rustom Building …….………. अऩीरधथी / 29, Veer Nariman Road Appellant Mumbai 400 023 Pan – Aaacn1289P V/S Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax ..…….………. प्रत्मथी / Range–2(2), Aayakar Bhawan Respondent 101, M.K. Road, Mumbai 400 020 ननधधारयती की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri H.S. Raheja यधजस्व की ओय से / Revenue By : Shri Samir Tekriwal सुनवधई की तधयीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing – 08.10.2015 Date Of Order – 30.10.2015

For Appellant: Shri H.S. RahejaFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal

…ading Pvt. Ltd., 111 ITD 249 (Mum.) (TM); ii) Poompuhar Shipping Corporation Ltd., 39 TTJ 206 (Mad.) iii) T.N. Dairy Development Corp. Ltd., 216 ITR 535; iv) Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd., 284 ITR 389; v) Paramount Premises Pvt. Ltd., 190 ITR 259; and vi) Lok Holds, 308 ITR 356. M/s. Nathuram Ramnarayan Pvt. Ltd. 7 7. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relying upon the findings of the Departmental Authorities submitted that during the year, neither the assessee has started any business venture nor shown any business income. The income derived by the assessee is from rent, dividend, interest and…