CIT v. Nainital Bank Ltd.

55 ITR 707Supreme Court of India1965#1522 most cited
75

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Nainital Bank Ltd. · 55 ITR 707 SC · Section 37 Income-tax Act · Section 10(2)(xv) 1922 Act · business expenditure deductibility · proximate nexus business · business expediency test · legal expenses · expenditure prohibited by law · Section 132 search and seizure · Section 153A proceedings

Sections most often in play

Section 37Section 143(3)Section 250Section 132Section 144Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147

Issues it is cited on

section 153cofproximate nexussection 10(2)(xv)section 153a proceedingssection 10(2)section 36(2)explanation to section 37business expediencylegal expensesprohibited by lawsection 158bdsection 269s

Judgments citing CIT v. Nainital Bank Ltd.

Altus Group (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1226/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

…provided (i) the losses are of a non- capital nature and (ii) they are not merely connected with the trade but are incidental to trade itself." These principles were affirmed by the Supreme Court in Badridas Daga v CIT (34, ITR 10,15), CIT v National bank ltd 55 ITR 707 and Ramchandar Shivnarayan v CIT. 1.10 That there are numerous judgment in the order of judicial discipline wherein such deductions have been allowed. “Deduction should be allowed under this section in respect of a loss arising from forfeiture of security deposit as a result of non performance of a trading contract. Various case laws are Naranda…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Altus Group (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1276/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37Section 37(1)

…provided (i) the losses are of a non- capital nature and (ii) they are not merely connected with the trade but are incidental to trade itself." These principles were affirmed by the Supreme Court in Badridas Daga v CIT (34, ITR 10,15), CIT v National bank ltd 55 ITR 707 and Ramchandar Shivnarayan v CIT. 1.10 That there are numerous judgment in the order of judicial discipline wherein such deductions have been allowed. “Deduction should be allowed under this section in respect of a loss arising from forfeiture of security deposit as a result of non performance of a trading contract. Various case laws are Naranda…

Trushar Parimal Shah, Bhavnagar vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), Bhavnagar

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

ITA 268/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Oct 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 268/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2013-14) बनाम/ Trushar Parimal Shah The Income Tax 354, Madhav Darshan Officer Vs. Waghawadi Road Ward-1(3) Bhavnagar-364 002 Bhavnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Axwps5561M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Tushar P. Hemani, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Nilabra Dasgupta, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing 29/08/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement 01/10/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar P. Hemani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilabra Dasgupta, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ SMC ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 268/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2013-14) बनाम/ Trushar Parimal Shah The Income Tax 354, Madhav Darshan Officer Vs. Waghawadi Road Ward-1(3) Bhavnagar-364 002 Bhavnagar "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AXWPS5561M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Tushar P. Hemani, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by: Shri Nilabra Dasgupta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of Hearing 29/08/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /D…

Dholu Construction & Projects Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3144/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Amarjit Singh)

For Appellant: Shri Bandish Soparkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(24)(x)Section 801ASection 801A(4)

…erroneously held that the amount written off was loans and advance. In fact as stated in Statement of facts, this is fundamental misconception of the AO. As held by the Apex Court in the case of Badridas daga vs CIT 34 ITR 10 (SC) and in CIT vs Nainital Bank 55 ITR 707 (SC) any loss incidental to carrying on of the business is allowable deduction in computing business profit under section 28 of the Income tax Act. This is also the view taken by Bombay High Court in G.G.Dandekar Machine Works vs CIT202 ITR 161 (Bom). The jurisdictional Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs Abdul Razak & Co has also held that a…

Haware Infrastructure Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 15(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2543/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra (AR)For Respondent: Shri B. Srinivas (CIT-DR) &
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 22Section 254(1)

…n their hands in their returns would not be relevant in deciding the issue whether the payment by the assessee should be treated as business expenditure. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court relied on the decision of Shahazada Nand & Sons (supra), Nainital Bank Ltd. (62 ITR 638), Sharada Binding Works (102 ITR 187). 38. In CIT Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "a large quantity of jewellery pledged with assessee bank by its constituents were stolen by dacoits from premises of bank. Bank paid the market value of the 10 ITA No. 2543 & 4021 Mum 2019-Haware Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. jewelle…

Mercedes - Benz India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

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

ITA 1865/PUN/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Aug 2019AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ Ita No. 1865/Pun/2013 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1999-2000 Mercedes Benz India Private Limited. ( Formerly Known As Daimler Chrysler India Private Limited) E-3, Midc Chakan, Phase-Iii, Chakan Industrial Area, Kuruli & Nighoje, Tal : Khed, Pune-410 501. Pan : Aabcm 1789L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune. ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala &For Respondent: Shri S. B. Prasad
Section 35A

…ing of “consideration” qua the Indian Contracts Act, 1872, Ld. Counsel relied on various decisions which are extracted in para 27 of the written note. Ld. Counsel relied on the judgment of 13 A.Y.1999-2000 Supreme Court in the case CIT Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. 62 ITR 638 stating that the term “expenditure” includes the payment in kind. It is the argument submitted before us without prejudice to the other arguments. In this regard, stating that the provision of section 35AB of the Act, being a deduction provision needs to be interpreted liberally and for this, Ld. Counsel relied on the decision of Delhi Bench of th…

M/S Kalyani Buildwell Private Ltd, Agra vs. ACIT Circle4(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 292/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 Mar 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Dr. Mitha Lal Meenam/S Kalyani Buildwell (P) Ltd., Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Kalyani Point, Near Tulsi Income-Tax, Circle-4(1), Agra Cinema, Bye-Pass Road, Agra Pan No: Aacck7095G (Assessee) (Revenue)

Section 133ASection 43B

…ed reliance on the following case laws:- a) CIT vs. Khaitan Chemical & Fertilizers Ltd.326 ITR 114 b) CIT vs. Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. 66 ITR 710 (SC) c) CIT vs. Mysore Sugar Co. Ltd. reported in 46 ITR 649 SC) d) CIT vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. reported in 55 ITR 707 (SC) 7.2.1 The Ld AR further contented that, in immediately succeeding Assessment Years i.e. 2012-13 and 2013-14, the claim of lease deed expenses was allowed by the Ld AO for 15 years. So, instead of proportionating it in 15 years it should be proportionated in 5 years. Copy of the assessment order are placed before us. 7.3 Ld DR on the other ha…

Commissioner of Income Tax VIII vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 742 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 742/2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue. versus GOPAL DAS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD . .... Respondent Through: Mr. M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arta Trana Panda and Ms.Gargi Sethee, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER 20.03.2019 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is directed against the judgment dated 9th May 20…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 548 / 2010HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 548/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .... Appellant Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue. versus GOPAL DAS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD . ..... Respondent Through: Mr. M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arta Trana Panda and Ms.Gargi Sethee, Advocates. CORAM:JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER 20.03.2019 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is directed against the judgme…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 400 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA400/2009 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue. versus GOPAL DAS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD. ..... Respondent Through : Mr. M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arta TranaPanda and Ms.GargiSethee, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER 20.03.2019 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is directed against the judgment dated 27thJune 2008 of t…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 581 / 2010HC Delhi20 Mar 2019
Section 260

…$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 581/2010 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ... Appellant Through: Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue versus GOPAL DAS ESTATES & HOUSING PVT.LTD . .... Respondent Through: Mr. M.S. Syali, Senior Advocate with Mr. Arta Trana Panda and Ms.Gargi Sethee, Advocates. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA ORDER 20.03.2019 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is directed against the judgment dated 22n…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Bharuch vs. Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank, Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 229/SRT/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O. P. Meena

…/I.T.A. No. 1059& CO88/Ahd/2015/A.Y.11-12 &I.T.A.No. 228&229/2018/A.Y. 12-13 &13-14 Page 9 of 12 for same in the books of accounts. The assessee has also filed copy of FIR with Police. The assessee has also placed reliance in the case of CIT v. National Bank 55 ITR 707 (SC) , Dandekar Machine Works v. CIT 202 ITR 161 (Bombay) and others. In view of these facts and circumstances, the CIT (A) observed that the assessee has lodged a FIR with Police Department on 24.06.2010 and a complaint with CBI on 31.12.2010. The amount mentioned in the FIR was at Rs.1,32,20,000 whereas the amount mentioned with complaint with C…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Bharuch vs. Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank, Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 228/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O. P. Meena

…/I.T.A. No. 1059& CO88/Ahd/2015/A.Y.11-12 &I.T.A.No. 228&229/2018/A.Y. 12-13 &13-14 Page 9 of 12 for same in the books of accounts. The assessee has also filed copy of FIR with Police. The assessee has also placed reliance in the case of CIT v. National Bank 55 ITR 707 (SC) , Dandekar Machine Works v. CIT 202 ITR 161 (Bombay) and others. In view of these facts and circumstances, the CIT (A) observed that the assessee has lodged a FIR with Police Department on 24.06.2010 and a complaint with CBI on 31.12.2010. The amount mentioned in the FIR was at Rs.1,32,20,000 whereas the amount mentioned with complaint with C…

The Addl.CIT., Bharuch Range, Bharuch vs. M/S. Baroda Gujarat Gramin Bank, Bharuch

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for A

ITA 1059/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri O. P. Meena

…/I.T.A. No. 1059& CO88/Ahd/2015/A.Y.11-12 &I.T.A.No. 228&229/2018/A.Y. 12-13 &13-14 Page 9 of 12 for same in the books of accounts. The assessee has also filed copy of FIR with Police. The assessee has also placed reliance in the case of CIT v. National Bank 55 ITR 707 (SC) , Dandekar Machine Works v. CIT 202 ITR 161 (Bombay) and others. In view of these facts and circumstances, the CIT (A) observed that the assessee has lodged a FIR with Police Department on 24.06.2010 and a complaint with CBI on 31.12.2010. The amount mentioned in the FIR was at Rs.1,32,20,000 whereas the amount mentioned with complaint with C…

Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1381/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

…s. On the meaning of “consideration” qua the Indian Contracts Act, 1872, Ld. Counsel relied on various decisions which are extracted in para 27 of the written note. Ld. Counsel relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case CIT Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. 62 ITR 638 stating that the term “expenditure” includes the payment in kind. It is the argument submitted before us without prejudice to the other arguments. In this regard, stating that the provision of section 35AB of the Act, being a deduction provision needs to be interpreted liberally and for this, Ld. Counsel relied on the decision of Delhi Bench of…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Daimler Chrysler India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

In the result, the cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1325/PUN/2003[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Aug 2018AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.1381/Pun/2003 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 1998-09 वष"

For Appellant: Shri Pramod AchuthanFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 15ASection 35A

…s. On the meaning of “consideration” qua the Indian Contracts Act, 1872, Ld. Counsel relied on various decisions which are extracted in para 27 of the written note. Ld. Counsel relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case CIT Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd. 62 ITR 638 stating that the term “expenditure” includes the payment in kind. It is the argument submitted before us without prejudice to the other arguments. In this regard, stating that the provision of section 35AB of the Act, being a deduction provision needs to be interpreted liberally and for this, Ld. Counsel relied on the decision of Delhi Bench of…

M/S Saraswaty Press Limited, Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata

ITA 2220/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 36(2)Section 36(2)(i)

…estion. Coming to the latter issue of having not included said VAT amount as income, we are of the view that assessee’s impugned write off is very much incidental to carrying out of its business activity. We thus follow hon'ble apex court’s decision in (1965) 55 ITR 707 CIT vs. Nanital Bank Ltd. to conclude that assessee’s impugned claim is rather allowable as a business loss u/s 28 r.w.s 37 of the Act. We accordingly delete the impugned disallowance. 5. Next issue in assessee’s instant appeal is that of disallowance of earnest money deposit of ₹7,55,500/- as no longer recoverable. The CIT(A)’s findings under ch…

ACIT, Circle-10(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Saraswaty Press Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1793/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 36(2)Section 36(2)(i)

…estion. Coming to the latter issue of having not included said VAT amount as income, we are of the view that assessee’s impugned write off is very much incidental to carrying out of its business activity. We thus follow hon'ble apex court’s decision in (1965) 55 ITR 707 CIT vs. Nanital Bank Ltd. to conclude that assessee’s impugned claim is rather allowable as a business loss u/s 28 r.w.s 37 of the Act. We accordingly delete the impugned disallowance. 5. Next issue in assessee’s instant appeal is that of disallowance of earnest money deposit of ₹7,55,500/- as no longer recoverable. The CIT(A)’s findings under ch…

Exterior-Interior Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2224/KOL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am ] Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri T.P.Kar, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.Dasgupta, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 2

…f AO and the action of AO is hereby confirmed. This ground is dismissed.” 5. Learned counsel representing assessee quotes case law in CIT vs Smt Pukhraj Wati Bubber 296 ITR 290 (Punjab & Haryana), Badridas Daga vs CIT 34 ITR 10 (SC), CIT vs Nainital Bank Ltd 55 ITR 707 (SC), Ramchandra Shivnarayan vs CIT 111 ITR 263 (AP) to plead that any loss caused by way of dacoity, embezzlement is a trading loss allowable u/s 37 of the Act in the event of a direct nexus between theft vis-avis the relevant business operations. Learned counsel therefore contends that the assessee is very much entitled to get deduction of the i…

Suri Engineers Private Limited., Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4)., Hyderabad

In the result, the assessee appeal is allowed

ITA 1387/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Jan 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Suri Engineers Pvt. Vs. The Ito, Ward-3(4), Ltd., Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan- Aaccs8544A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri V. Jagadisan Revenue By : Smt. Suman Malik

For Appellant: Shri V. JagadisanFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik
Section 143(3)

…contentions, he placed reliance upon the following case law: a. Badridas Daga Vs. CIT 34 ITR 10 (SC). b. Ramchander Shivnarayan 111 ITR 263 (SC). 7 M/s Suri Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. c. Dr. T.A Quershi Vs CIT 287 ITR 547. d. CIT Vs Nainital Bank Ltd., 55 ITR 707 (SC). e. Chenab Forest Co. Vs CIT 96 ITR 568 (J &K). f. CIT Vs Inden Biselers 181 ITR 69 (Madras). g. Idea Cellular Ltd., Vs ACIT 65 SOT 15. 6. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the asset being a capital asset, the capital loss cannot be allowed from the profits of the business as right…