How many judgments cite CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody?

386 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519), spanning 2009 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 57(iii), Section 1961, Section 14A, Section 37(1), Section 68.

CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

115 ITR 519Supreme Court of India1978#191 most cited

What is CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody authority for?

For deductions under Section 57(iii) relating to "Income from Other Sources," an expenditure is allowable if it is laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income, even if no income is actually earned in that previous year.

386

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody · Rajendra Prasad Moody · 115 ITR 519 · Section 57(iii) · Income from Other Sources · deductibility of expenditure · expenses without income · wholly and exclusively · purpose of making income · Section 14A distinction · disallowance of expenses

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 57(iii)Section 1961 Section 14A Section 37(1)Section 68 Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 57 disallowance u/s 14a disallowance under section 14a section 14a capital expenditure section 37(1)income from other sources section 37 salary previous year section 10

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

Kapil Taneja, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle 3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 13/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…e of business and it appears that disallowance has been made as per section 57(iii), though provisions of section 57(iii) have not been invoked specifically. Even w.r.t. section 57(iii), Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 held that: "the plain natural construction of the language of section 57(iii) of the Act irresistibly leads to the conclusion that to bring a case within that section it is not necessary that any income should in fact have been earned as a result of the expenditure. What section 57(iii) of the Act requires is that the expenditure must be laid out…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Benetton India Pvt. Ltd

ITA/472/2018HC Delhi06 Feb 2025

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

For Appellant: Mr. Shlok Chandra, SSC with Ms. MadhviFor Respondent: Mr. Himanshu S. Sinha, Mr. Prashant

Section 143(1)Section 260ASection 92BSection 92C

…credit side to justify the deduction of an expense”. The question whether an expenditure can be allowed as a deduction only if it has resulted in any income or profits came to be considered by the Supreme Court again in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC), and it was observed as under: - “We fail to appreciate how expenditure which is otherwise a proper expenditure can cease to be such merely because there is no receipt of income. Whatever is a proper outgoing by way of expenditure must be debited irrespective of whether there is receipt of income or not. That is the plain requirement…

Mohalla Tech Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4123/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2017-18 Mohalla Tech Private Limited Acit, Circle – 7(2)(2), Mumbai No. 2, 26, 27 & 3, Sona Towers, 1St Floor, Krishna Nagar Industrial Vs Area, Hosur Main Road, Bangalore- 560029. Pan: Aajcm 5415 D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chavali Narayanan (Hybrid)For Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT, DR

Section 250Section 37Section 37(1)

…assessee has already developed the mobile app which had been down loaded number of times during the year as discussed supra in this order. We have also perused the judicial pronouncement referred by the ld. Counsel in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC) wherein on the proposition that it is not necessary that any income should infact has been earned as a result of expenditure. 8. After taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances as discussed above in this order, we consider that decision of ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the disallowance of expenditure by the assessing officer is 9 Mo…

ACIT, Circle 1(1), Trivandrum vs. Hll Lifecare Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the Special Bench decision in the case of Cheminvest

ITA 321/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior ARFor Respondent: --- None ---

Section 14A

…taken a similar view. The decision in Taikisha Engineering India (P) Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the A.Y. in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: “20. Since the Special Bench has relied upon the decision of the Supreme C…

Maaz Mohammed Yusuf Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Assessing Officer, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 603/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2016-17 Maaz Mohammed Yusuf Shaikh, Assessing Officer, Ward-17(2)(3), A-1308, 13Th Floor, Ozone Biz Centre, Mumbai-400012. Bellasis Road, Boman Behram Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 008. Pan No. Axpps 2316 F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Jayant BhattFor Respondent: Mr. Umesh Chandra Sinha

Section 57

…incurred interest expenditure and the same is allowable as deduction even if the interest income has not been received. In support of this proposition, he placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519)(SC). 6. The Ld D.R, on the contrary, supported the order passed by Ld CIT(A). 7. We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the assessee has received interest income from M/s Excellent Realtors Developer in the immediately preceding year and did not receive interest income in this year. The disallowance of interest expenditure h…

Ravindra Madanlal Khandelwal, Akola vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle, Akola

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

ITA 375/NAG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 144BSection 68

…provisions of section does not require that this purpose must be fulfilled in order to qualify, the expenditure for deduction it does not say that the expenditure shall be deductible only if any income is made or earned [CIT v/s Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978], 115 ITR 519 (SC). In the present case, the assessee has made an investment in a related company and the resultant income in the form of a dividend income, interest income or directors’ remuneration fall within the head of “income from other sources”. Therefore, for claiming deduction under section 57(iii) of the Act, it would be sufficient to prove that ther…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 303/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…sion in Taikisha Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) does not specifically deal with this issue. 22. It was suggested by Mr. Hossain that, in the context of Section 57(iii), the Supreme Court in Commissioner Of Income Tax, West v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) explained that deduction is allowable even where income was not actually earned in the AY in question. This aspect of the matter was dealt with by this Court in M/s Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it reversed the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT by observing as under: 33 I.T.A No. 198 & 199/Ahd/2023 & Ors. A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18 Pag…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 302/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 199/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result the Ground Nos

ITA 198/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

Kothari Sanjay Manilal, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-3(1)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 698/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 698/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19)

For Appellant: & Shri Parin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 57

…societies in the earlier years but as the loan was repaid in the current year, no interest income thereon was received during the year. Ld. Senior Counsel also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC)and submitted that the interest expenses borrowed for earning of income has to be allowed even though the income may not be earned during any particular year. 17. Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee was entitled for deduction of interest only if the entire borrowed fund was utilized for the purpose of earning of income. He…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahatta Towers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1137/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Dcit, Vs M/S. Mahatta Towers Pvt.Ltd., Circle-16(1), 614, Plot No.54, Mahatta Towers, New Delhi. B Block, Community Center, Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058. Pan-Aaacm2109F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Koushlender Tiwari, Cit Dr Respondent By Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Date Of Hearing 13.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 10.10.2024

Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…61/- u/s 14 A of the Act without considering legal principles that allowability or disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519? 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or forgo any ground/(s) of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee is a company and engaged in the business of construction of commercial properties and sale and purchase of flats etc., electronically fi…

ITO, Ward-28(5), Pratyakshkar Bhawan vs. Satish Sawhney, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2118/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarito, Ward 28 (5), Vs. Satish Sawhney, 1St Floor, West Wing, Delhi. Chandralok Building 36, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001. (Pan : Aaaps2377N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 07.08.2024 Date Of Order : 09.10.2024 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman, Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To ‘Ld. Cit (A)’) Dated 29.02.2024 For Ay 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are, Assessee An Individual Having Income From ‘House Property’, Capital Gain’S & Other Sources. The Assessee Filed Return Of Income On 31.8.20215 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.44,62,580/-.

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Kirti Sankratyayan, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 37(1)Section 57

…x (Appeals) vide findings recorded in paras 12 to 12.3 at pages 71-72 of the order. 6.8. It is submitted that the aforesaid issue is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Rajendra 8 Prasad Moody reported in 115 ITR 519. It is submitted that the quantum of expenditure is neither determinative nor relevant for allowability of expenditure. It is also submitted that evidences on record in respect of disallowance of sum of Rs. 2,30,36,645/- u/s 57(iii) of the Act is as under:- Sr. Name of the party Services rendered Amount No. (Rs.) i) A&G Corporate Professional c…

DCIT Circle 1(1), Trivandrum vs. M/S State Bank of Travancore Retired Employees Medical Benefit Scheme, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 401/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Smt.Girly Albert, Sr.DRFor Respondent: --- None ---

Section 57

…) of sec.57 of the Act. The assessee challenged the said order before the CIT(A) and contended that the order of the AO is not correct and it is also against the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody reported in (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC) and also the assessee relied on the order of the learned CIT(A) in respect of the assessment year 2013-2014 in which the claim was allowed. The ld.CIT(A) had considered the issue in detail and allowed the appeal. As against the said order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has filed the present appeal with the following grounds of appeal:- “1. The…

Magendra Singh Rathore, Alwar vs. DCIT Central Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 483/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargiya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 57

…d to be genuine, merely because it resulted into less or equal amount of income, would not become a colourable device and consequently earning any disqualification - Held, yes" Further in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that: “what section 57(iii) requires is that the expenditure must be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning income. It is the purpose of expenditure that is relevant in determining the applicability of section 57(iii) and that purpose must be making or earning of income…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Net 4 India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, in the terms indicated herein above

ITA 3657/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs M/S. Net 4 India Ltd., Circle-18(1), Ab-11, Community Centre, New Delhi. Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110029. Pan-Aaact0291M Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, Cit Dr Respondent By None Date Of Hearing 29.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.09.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld.Cit(A)-42, New Delhi Dated 17.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Revenue Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 14Section 145(3)

…mounting to Rs. 8,91,305/- without considering legal principles that allowability/disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the Income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519? 8. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) is legally justified in not upholding the disallowance u/s 14 A of the Act r.w. R SD of the Rule of Rs. 79,41,003/- without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in cases of CIT Vs Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P Ltd [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC) and Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 34…

ACIT, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Hinduja National Power Corporation Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 257/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Hinduja National Power Income Tax, Corporation Limited, Circle – 2 (1), Sanathinagar, Hyderabad. Hyderabad – 500018. Pan : Aabch2426D

For Appellant: Shri K. A Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Ms. TH Vijaya Lakshmi, CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 57

…rces u/s 56 of the Income Tax Act because of the direct nexus between the funds borrowed, which are kept in banks fixed deposits and interest earned on such fixed deposits. In this context, we seek to rely on the following decisions: a. Rajendra Prasad Moddy 115 ITR 519 (SC) b. Bokaro Steel, 151 CTR 276 (SC) c. CIT v/s Andhra Far, 171 ITR 660 (AP) and (B) provisions of section 57 (iii) of I T Act, 1961 6.1. The ld.DR has submitted that there is no verification of facts as to the amount required to be deposited for issuance of letter of credit by the bank and further, the amount borrowed for the mega project and…

Anesh Nandkumar Agarwal, Pune vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1419/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1419/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ratnakar Shelake

Section 143(3)Section 57

…intention to earn profit can be allowed as 4 deduction u/s.57(iii) of the Act. It is not necessary that any income should infact have been earned as a result of the expenditure as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519 (SC). In view of above discussion, Ground of appeal No. 2 raised by the appellant is also allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 29th day of August, 2024. (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated : 29th August, 2024. Satish आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. M2K Entertainment Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6725/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhasstt. Yr: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 24Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…llowance should be equivalent to tax exempt income without considering a legal principle that allowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon earning of income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519? 3.1 Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in restricting the disallowance of Rs. 3,23,435/- to Rs. 10,759/- u/s 14A of the Act r.w. R 8D of the Rule without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in case of Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) on application of Rule 8D? 4. Whether i…

Sohamnagar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vibhag II, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(6), Ahmedabad

In the result appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 177/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Which Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 17-01-2023 In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048850676(1)

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234Section 250Section 37Section 56Section 57

…ncome. The link is between expenditure incurred and income earned. To be eligible for deduction under section 57(iii) of the Act, expenditure incurred should be linked to earning of income. 6.6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 had observed as under:- "What section 57(iii) requires is that the expenditure must be laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning income. It is the purpose of I.T.A No. 177/Ahd/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No. 8 Sohamnagar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. ITO the expenditure that is relevant in determining the…