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 367,154 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 1961Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 68Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 57disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14acapital expendituresection 37(1)income from other sourcessection 37salaryprevious yearsection 10

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

DCIT Circle-25(2), New Delhi vs. Transcend Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5178/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit Vs. Transcend Infrastructure Circle – 25(2) Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi - 110002 Plot No. B-15, Ff, Sec-32, Gurgaon-122 001 Pan No. Aacct 7115 Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…in an income, i.e., positive income, which is in any case a matter subsequent, and that the mere fact that expenditure stands incurred for the purpose is sufficient for its admissibility, as explained by the Apex Court in CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC). 4. The Apex Court was in that case examining the true interpretation of section 57(iii), which employed the words 'any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure) laid out or expended for the purpose of making or earning such income', the question of law raised before it reading as under:- "Whether, on the facts and in the…

Sri. Venkateswara Developers, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(2)(1), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2474/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., DR
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…should not be in the nature of capital expenditure. The AO relied on the judicial decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad ITA No.1910 & 2474/Bang/2019 Sri Venkateswara Developers, Bangalore Page 5 of 11 Moody 115 ITR 519 and held that the purpose of payment of interest by the assessee to the Bank was not for earning of interest income and thus disallowed the claim of the assessee and brought to tax interest income of Rs.2,03,06,884/- as income from other sources. The assessee has filed this appeal against this order of AO. 3.1 Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of t…

Sri Venkateswara Developers, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 7(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1910/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Narayana K.R., DR
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 251(2)Section 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…should not be in the nature of capital expenditure. The AO relied on the judicial decisions including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad ITA No.1910 & 2474/Bang/2019 Sri Venkateswara Developers, Bangalore Page 5 of 11 Moody 115 ITR 519 and held that the purpose of payment of interest by the assessee to the Bank was not for earning of interest income and thus disallowed the claim of the assessee and brought to tax interest income of Rs.2,03,06,884/- as income from other sources. The assessee has filed this appeal against this order of AO. 3.1 Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of t…

DCIT 3(2) (1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Mukund Ltd, Mumbai

Accordingly, ground no 3 is allowed

ITA 1794/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Raj Mehta(ACA), A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Sonia Kumar, D.R
Section 115JSection 14A

…cludible in total income; hence, section 14A will not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during relevant previous year.lt has been noted by the Hon'ble High Court that decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519 (SC)) was rendered in the context of allowability of deduction under section 57(iii) of the Act, where the expression used is 'for the purpose of making or earning such income1. Section 14A of the Act on other hand contains the expression 'in relation to income which does not form part of the total income.' The Court held that the decision in Raj…

The Jt. Comm of Income Tax (OSD) Cent .Cir-6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S D''Decor Properties LLP, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1743/MUM/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: This Extended Date, Accordingly, We Hold That There Is No Delay In Filing Of Appeal By The Revenue.

Section 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…it side to justify the deduction of an expense. 1 agree on this question with the decision of the Courts below. 3.6. Reliance was also placed in this regard on the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody reported in 115 ITR 519. It is sufficient that the asset becomes capable of generating 8 M/s. D’décor Properties LLP income for the purpose of allowability of business expenditure or business deductions. As far as the finance cost is concerned, once the borrowed funds are utilized for the purpose of business of the assessee, the interest paid on such borrowed funds be…

M/S. Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2556/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2556/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, Sr. ARFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite, D.R
Section 143(3)

…on. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the interest expenditure claimed by the assessee by invoking sec.115BBD of the Act. 29.3 Before Ld. DRP, the assessee placed its reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Mody (115 ITR 519) and contended that the expenditure is allowable, even if dividend income is not received during the year under consideration. However, the Ld. DRP took the view that the investment made by the assessee is not with the objective of earning dividend income but for the purpose of acquiring controlling interest in the company. It held that the inter…

DCIT vs. M/S Fiza Developers & Infrastructer Pvt. Ltd

In the result, all the miscellaneous petitions are allowed

ITA 985/BANG/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 May 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri T.N. Prakash, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 263Section 54FSection 57

…proper to suggest to the Government to examine the feasibility of granting relief by amending the Act.” 33. Further in the case of Smt. Padmavathi Jaikrishna v. Addl. CIT, 166 ITR 176 (SC), it was held as follows:- “7. In CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC), this Court observed : "The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading, 'F—Income from other sources'. Section 56, wh…

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, CC-2, Ludhiana

In the result, all these three appeals are hereby allowed

ITA 1357/CHANDI/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: The Disposal Of The Present Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Mukhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 57Section 57o

…laimed by the assessee be allowed to be adjust against interest income offered to tax as there is no change in the facts & circumstances in the year under consideration...." The reliance was placed on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (115 ITR 519) (SC) • JK Industries (297 ITR 176)(Karn) • Venkateshwara real estate enterprises vs. CIT (Karn) • CIT vs. Taj International Jewellers (Del) • Sh. Roshan Sethia vs. ACIT (Mumbai ‘D’ Bench ITAT) 5.3 The Assessee also submitted to the A.O. vide reply dt. 14/12/2018 as under: " The interest expenditure (claimed u/s 57) has been made to earn the…

Hotel Skyline Private Limited, Bharuch vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are ( ITA No

ITA 691/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.690 & 691/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13 & 2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Bharuch Skyline Building, Old N.H. Vs. Nop.8, Nr. Hotel Maharaja, Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach 5317 A (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla,–Sr-DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36Section 37(1)Section 57

…ainst the Nil return on investment made in Affem Rolling Pvt. Ltd. We note that such interest expense is allowable under section 57(iii) the Act, for that reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519 (SC), wherein it was held as follows: “The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading 'F- Income From Other Sources'. Sec…

Hotel Skyline Private Limited, Bharuch vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are ( ITA No

ITA 690/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat07 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.690 & 691/Ahd/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2012-13 & 2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Ward -1(1), Bharuch Skyline Building, Old N.H. Vs. Nop.8, Nr. Hotel Maharaja, Bharuch "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaach 5317 A (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla,–Sr-DR
Section 143(3)Section 28Section 36Section 37(1)Section 57

…ainst the Nil return on investment made in Affem Rolling Pvt. Ltd. We note that such interest expense is allowable under section 57(iii) the Act, for that reliance can be placed on the decision of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519 (SC), wherein it was held as follows: “The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading 'F- Income From Other Sources'. Sec…

ACIT, C-4(1), Chandigarh vs. The Punjab State Co-Op. Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 998/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Aman Parti, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT,DR
Section 14A

…restricting the disallowance to the extent of exempt income received, without appreciating the fact that applicability of section 14A or Rule 8D does not depend on earning of income as held by Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajender Prasad Moody (1978), 115 ITR 519 ? (ix) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) is justified in restricting the disallowance to the extent of exempt income received, without appreciating the fact that there is no such restriction to disallow the interest to the extent exempt income earned stipulated either in section 14A of the Income Tax Act or…

Indian Tools Technology Centre, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Oficer Ward II(1), Jalandhar

ITA 234/ASR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 25Section 57

…turn of income by the appellant. Thus, no expenditure was incurred by the appellant to earn interest income. 6.4 During the appeal proceedings, the Ld. Counsel has relied on judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court decision in CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC) as followed by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in DDIT Vs. Petroleum Sports Promotion Board III DTR Delhi 55, holding that section 57(iii) must be construed broadly and the somewhat wider language of section 37 should not affect the interpretation of section 57 (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6.5 As far as question of claim of deduction u/s 57(i…

Arjun M Ranga, Mysuru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 692/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143Section 263Section 54FSection 57

…t proper to suggest to the Government to examine the feasibility of granting relief by amending the Act.” 27. Further in the case of Smt. Padmavathi Jaikrishna v. Addl. CIT, 166 ITR 176 (SC), it was held as follows:- “7. In CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC), this Court observed : "The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading, 'F—Income from other sources'. Section 56, wh…

Guru Pavan Ranga, Mysuru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central), Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 677/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143Section 263Section 54FSection 57

…t proper to suggest to the Government to examine the feasibility of granting relief by amending the Act.” 33. Further in the case of Smt. Padmavathi Jaikrishna v. Addl. CIT, 166 ITR 176 (SC), it was held as follows:- “7. In CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC), this Court observed : "The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading, 'F—Income from other sources'. Section 56, wh…

Anirudh Murthy Ranga, Mysuru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 676/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143Section 263Section 54FSection 57

…t proper to suggest to the Government to examine the feasibility of granting relief by amending the Act.” 33. Further in the case of Smt. Padmavathi Jaikrishna v. Addl. CIT, 166 ITR 176 (SC), it was held as follows:- “7. In CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC), this Court observed : "The determination of the question before us turns on the true interpretation of section 57(iii) and it would, therefore, be convenient to refer to that section, but before we do so, we may point out that section 57(iii) occurs in a fasciculus of sections under the heading, 'F—Income from other sources'. Section 56, wh…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Power Sankonahatti Athni Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…t payment on borrowed funds was rejected by the Income-tax authorities. However, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee. On a reference to the Madras High Court, after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 and various other judgments of the High Courts, found that the borrowing has not been exclusively and solely for the purpose of earning interest in which case alone it should be taken as income which should be deducted from the interest receipt. This judgment of the Madras High Court in Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. (supra) was specifically ta…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ksk Wind Energy Halagali Benchi Private Limied, Hyderabad

In the result, all the four appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 33/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Energy Ward-2(1), Halagali Benchi Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1965 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Sankonahatti Athni Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1900 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao Revenue By: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. Ar Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ksk Wind Power Ward-2(1), Aminabhavi Chikodi Hyderabad. Private Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaeck 1888 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Sri Sunil Gowtham, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…t payment on borrowed funds was rejected by the Income-tax authorities. However, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee. On a reference to the Madras High Court, after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 and various other judgments of the High Courts, found that the borrowing has not been exclusively and solely for the purpose of earning interest in which case alone it should be taken as income which should be deducted from the interest receipt. This judgment of the Madras High Court in Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. (supra) was specifically ta…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(1), Hyderabad vs. L & T Metro Rail (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 1412/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. L & T Metro Rail Circle-16(1), (Hyderabad) Limited, Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabcl 8521 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ashik Shah Revenue By: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 21/01/2022 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

For Appellant: Shri Ashik ShahFor Respondent: Sri B. Sunil Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 56

…t payment on borrowed funds was rejected by the Income-tax authorities. However, the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee. On a reference to the Madras High Court, after referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 and various other judgments of the High Courts, found that the borrowing has not been exclusively and solely for the purpose of earning interest in which case alone it should be taken as income which should be deducted from the interest receipt. This judgment of the Madras High Court in Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. (supra) was specifically ta…

Madanlal Mulchandas Jariwala, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 388/SRT/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.388/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Madanlal Mulchandas Jariwala, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(2)(3), 4512, Ganchisheri Begampura, Surat. Surat-395003. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abbpj5168J (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By:Shri Mehul R. Shah, Ca Revenue By:Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2021 घोषणाक"तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cit(A), Surat-1/10530/2017-18 Dated 18.07.2019, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”].

For Appellant: Shri Mehul R. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 57

…r expenses which the assessee has incurred to earn said income shown by him under the head “income from other sources” . In this regard, the reliance can be placed on the judgment of the Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case ofCIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC), wherein the Hon`ble Court observed as follows: “The revenue being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal made an application in each case for reference of the following question of law, namely: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, interest on money borrowed for investment in shares which had not yielded any divide…

Gbt India Private Limited, Delhi vs. National E-Assesment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Stay application is accordingly held to be infructuous

ITA 462/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)

…he 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, 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 of proper a…