What is CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd. authority for?

Interest expenditure under Section 36(1)(iii) is deductible for borrowed funds invested for business purposes, even if the investment does not immediately generate income, provided there is a proximate nexus to the assessee's business.

How many judgments cite CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd.?

56 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd. (48 Taxmann.com 57), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 36(1)(iii), Section 139, Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 132.

CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd. (48 Taxmann.com 57)

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1252/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Yamuna, CIT

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ctors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. 10.18 We also gainfully refer the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of RPG Transmissions Ltd. v. CIT (359 ITR 673), wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that Section 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act does not mandate earning income for the purpose of claiming deduction of interest expenditure. The relevant extracts of the judgment are as under: “Section 36(1)(iii) contemplates that, firstly, the money should have been borrowed by the assessee, secondly, it must have…

DCIT, CC2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

ITA 1251/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Yamuna, CIT

Section 132Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ctors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. 10.18 We also gainfully refer the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Madras High Court in the case of RPG Transmissions Ltd. v. CIT (359 ITR 673), wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that Section 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act does not mandate earning income for the purpose of claiming deduction of interest expenditure. The relevant extracts of the judgment are as under: “Section 36(1)(iii) contemplates that, firstly, the money should have been borrowed by the assessee, secondly, it must have…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE COMPANY LTD, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2836/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr. Ajith Kumar Jain CA & Mr. Kunal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT &

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43(5)

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,‘सी’"ायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीएबीटीवक", "ाियकसद"एवं"ीएस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.: 2613 & 2732/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Cholamandalam Investment and The Deputy Commissioner of Finance Company Limited, Income Tax, Chola Crest, C 54 & C 55, V. Corporate Circle -1(1), Super B-4, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Chennai – 600 034. Guindy, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai – 600 032. [PAN: AAACC-122…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2820/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Mr. Ajith Kumar Jain CA & Mr. Kunal Shah, CAFor Respondent: Mr. R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT &

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43(5)

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,‘सी’"ायपीठ,चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ीएबीटीवक", "ाियकसद"एवं"ीएस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.: 2613 & 2732/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Cholamandalam Investment and The Deputy Commissioner of Finance Company Limited, Income Tax, Chola Crest, C 54 & C 55, V. Corporate Circle -1(1), Super B-4, Thiru Vi Ka Industrial Estate, Chennai – 600 034. Guindy, Guindy Industrial Estate S.O., Chennai – 600 032. [PAN: AAACC-122…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. R R INDUSTRIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2502/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2502/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. R R Industries Limited, Income Tax, Tvk Industrial Estate, Company Circle 1(1) Guindy, Chennai. Chennai 600 032. [Pan:Aaacr 3594H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M.K. Rangaswamy, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 16.12.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Rangaswamy, FCAFor Respondent: Ms. D. Komali Krishna, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…pose of business. Accordingly, the inferences drawn by the AO in disallowing the proportionate interest on investments made out of borrowed funds are not well founded. 5.6.4 Further, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V. RPG Transmissions Ltd., (359 ITR 673) (2013) (Mad) referring to similar set of facts where assessee-company invested borrowed funds in shares of sister company having similar business, held that interest paid on borrowed capital was to be allowed. The operative portion of the said judgment is as under: "In the instant case, the Tribunal found that there is proximate nexus between th…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOUTH CITY PROJECTS (KOLKATA) LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1096/KOL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सट"य एवं "ी "द"प कुमार चौबे, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1096/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 DCIT, Circle-11(1), Kolkata Vs. South City Projects (Kolkata) Limited (PAN: AAACD 8933 A) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / ""यथ" Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 31.07.2024 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 24.10.2024 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the Appellant/ Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, A.R "नधा"रती क" ओर से Smt. Vid…

ACIT LTU 2, CHENNAI vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee (ITA No

ITA 946/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.775/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011 ) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 034. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.946/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011. ) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Income Tax, 763, Anna Salai, Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 002. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaaci 1223J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. C. Naresh, C.A., Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.775/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011 ) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 034. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.946/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011. ) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Incom…

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU-2, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee (ITA No

ITA 775/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.775/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011 ) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 034. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.946/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011. ) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Income Tax, 763, Anna Salai, Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 002. Chennai 600 034. [Pan: Aaaci 1223J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. C. Naresh, C.A., Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Irs, Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 06.08.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, IRS, CIT

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.775/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011 ) Indian Overseas Bank, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of 763, Anna Salai, Income Tax, Chennai 600 002. Large Taxpayer Unit-2, Chennai 600 034. आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.946/Chny/2018 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011. ) The Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Indian Overseas Bank, Incom…

DIVYANIDHI BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 616/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri V.K. Jain (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 45(3)

…is allowable. S.A. Builders Ltd. v/s CIT 288 ITR 1 (SC). Interest on funds borrowed for investment in joint venture/group 11 Divyanidhi Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. vs.ITO company allowable: CIT v/s Keventer Agro Ltd. 416 ITR 482 (Cal) 25-26 CIT v/s RPG Transmission 359 ITR 673 27-33 6. The ld. AR of the assessee vehemently argued that the assessee the expenditure incurred by the assessee is wholly and exclusively related to the business of the assessee. The assessee is engaged in the business of the real estate. After the incorporation the assessee has purchased the two chunk of the land. The assessee company has app…

ACIT CIRCLE 5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 2951/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jan 2024AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Jm M/S Essar Shipping Limited Acit, Circle 5(1)(1) Essar House, 11, R.No.568, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Kk Marg, Mahalaxmi, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 034 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aacce3707D

For Appellant: Shri Rishav Patawari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Sinha, CIT DR

Section 115VSection 143Section 144CSection 28Section 43Section 92Section 92CSection 92F

…s; a) CIT v. Phil Corporation Ltd [244 CTR 226 (Born)] b) CIT vs. Colgate Palmolive India Limited [(370 ITR 728) (Bom)] M/s Essar Shipping Limited; A.Y. 2012-13 c) CIT v. Investa Industrial Corpn. Ltd. [(119 FUR 380) (Bom.)] d) CIT v. RPG Transmission Ltd. [359 ITR 673 (Mad)] e) Raptakos Brett & Co. Ltd vs. PCIT. (ITA No. 2251/Mu m/2015) (Mumbai Tribunal) 35. In all the above cases, it has been held that if the investment is made in subsidiary for the purpose of business, the loss or expenditure incurred by assessee would be allowable as business expenditure. With respect to interest on aircraft taken on lease,…

ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 968/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…assessee to disclose fully and truly all material necessary for the assessment. i. ACITv.Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers(P.) Ltd.[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) ii. CITv.Foramer Finance (264 ITR 566) (SC) iii. Prashant Joshi vs. ITO (189 taxman 1) iv. RPG Transmission (359 ITR 673) (Mad HC) v.Kotarki Constructions(P.) Ltd. vs ACIT(89 taxmann.com 265)(Kar.HC) vi. Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. vs. ITO (332 ITR 226) (Bom.) vii.CIT vs. Hewlett-Packard Globalsoft(P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 386 (Karn.HC) viii. Viren Sureshchandra Shah v. ACIT (63 taxmann.com 104) (Guj.HC) ix. Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT(343 ITR 183) (Bom.) x. Vol…

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 930/HYD/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07 The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Eci Engineering & Income Tax, Construction Co., Ltd., Circle 17(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita 968/Hyd/2016 Assessment Year 2006-07 M/S. Eci Engineering & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Construction Co., Ltd., Income Tax, Hyderabad. Circle 2(2), Hyderabad. Pan : Aaace74411G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas Revenue By: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy. Date Of Hearing: 27.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.05.2023 O R D E R Per Laliet Kumar, J.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Respectively, Are Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 5, Hyderabad Dated 30.03.2016 For The Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The Abridged Grounds Raised By The Assessee In Ita No.968/Hyd/2016 Read As Under : “1. The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 5 Is Erroneous In Law In Facts & In Law. 2. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Decision Of The Ld.Ao In Treating Sale Of Partly Paid Up Shares As Fully Paid & Confirming The Addition Of Rs.50,14,625/- As Long Term Capital Gain. 3. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs.27,69,422/- Towards Difference In Interest. 4. Further, The Ld.Cit(A) Failed To Observe That The Notes To Financial Statements Clearly Mentioned The Interest Income Which Pertained To The Previous Year & Accordingly Erred In Upholding The Action Of The Ld.Ao In Assessing The Difference In Interest Of Rs.27,69,422/-. 5. The Ld.Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Difference Of Prior Period Income Of Rs.1,26,71,371/-.”

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R. Murthy

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 40

…assessee to disclose fully and truly all material necessary for the assessment. i. ACITv.Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers(P.) Ltd.[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) ii. CITv.Foramer Finance (264 ITR 566) (SC) iii. Prashant Joshi vs. ITO (189 taxman 1) iv. RPG Transmission (359 ITR 673) (Mad HC) v.Kotarki Constructions(P.) Ltd. vs ACIT(89 taxmann.com 265)(Kar.HC) vi. Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. vs. ITO (332 ITR 226) (Bom.) vii.CIT vs. Hewlett-Packard Globalsoft(P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 386 (Karn.HC) viii. Viren Sureshchandra Shah v. ACIT (63 taxmann.com 104) (Guj.HC) ix. Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT(343 ITR 183) (Bom.) x. Vol…

DEPUTY CIT-5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 821/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri M Balaganesh, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 821/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S Essar Shipping Dy. Cit-Circle – 5(3)(1), Limited R. No. 568, Aayakar बिधम/ Essar House, 11, K K Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 034 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aacce3707D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Prakash R. Mane, Ld. Dr प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Patwari/ Shri Rishav Patwari, Ld. Ars सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 18.08.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 14.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against Impugned Order Dated 28.02.2022, Passed By Ld. Cit (Appeals)-56, Mumbai For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S.

For Appellant: Shri Prakash R. ManeFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Patwari/ Shri

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 28Section 43Section 92Section 92F

…Phil Corporation Ltd [244 CTR 226 (Born)] 36 I.T.A. No. 821/Mum/2022 M/s Essar Shipping Limited b) CIT vs. Colgate Palmolive India Limited [(370 ITR 728) (Bom)] c) CIT v. Investa Industrial Corpn. Ltd. [(119 FUR 380) (Bom.)] d) CIT v. RPG Transmission Ltd. [359 ITR 673 (Mad)] Raptakos Brett & Co. Ltd vs. PCIT. (ITA No. 2251/Mu e) m/2015) (Mumbai Tribunal) 35. In all the above cases, it has been held that if the investment is made in subsidiary for the purpose of business, the loss or expenditure incurred by assessee would be allowable as business expenditure. With respect to interest on aircraft taken on lease,…

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3205/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3203/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3202/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 3201/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., V. The Dy. Commissioner- Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [Pan:Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.18/Chny/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Dy. Commissioner Of Income- V. M/S.Pvp Ventures Ltd., Krm Centre, 9Th Floor, Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), No.2, Harrington Road, Chennai. Chennai-600 031. [Pan: Aaacs 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.B. Ramakrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr.S.Palanikumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 36(1)(iii)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीवी. दुगा" राव,माननीय"ाियकसद"एवं "ीजी. मंजूनाथा, माननीयलेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLEJUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA Nos.3201-3202, 3203-3204 & 3205/Chny/2016 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/s.PVP Ventures Ltd., v. The Dy. Commissioner- KRM Centre, 9th Floor, of Income Tax, No.2, Harrington Road, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai-600 031. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 3101 P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.18/Chn…

GMR AIR CARGO & AEROSPACE ENGINEERING LTD(SUCCESSOR TO GMR HYDERABAD AIR CARGO & LOGISTICS PVT LTD),SHAMSHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 183/HYD/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2008-09 Gmr Air Cargo & Vs. Ito,Ward-2(3) Aerospace Engineering Signature Towers Ltd.(Successor To Gmr Kondapur, Kothaguda Hyderabad Air Cargo & Opp. Botanical Gardens Logistics Pvt Ltd.) R.R.District Rajiv Gandhi International Hyderabad-500 084 Airport, Samshabad Hyderabad-500 409

For Appellant: Shri K.C.DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37

…assessee to disclose fully and truly all material necessary for the assessment. i. ACITv.Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers(P.) Ltd.[2007] 291 ITR 500 (SC) ii. CITv.Foramer Finance (264 ITR 566) (SC) iii. Prashant Joshi vs. ITO (189 taxman 1) iv. RPG Transmission (359 ITR 673) (Mad HC) v.Kotarki Constructions(P.) Ltd. vs ACIT(89 taxmann.com 265)(Kar.HC) vi. Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. vs. ITO (332 ITR 226) (Bom.) vii.CIT vs. Hewlett-Packard Globalsoft(P.) Ltd. (380 ITR 386 (Karn.HC) viii. Viren Sureshchandra Shah v. ACIT (63 taxmann.com 104) (Guj.HC) ix. Titanor Components Ltd. vs. ACIT(343 ITR 183) (Bom.) x. Vol…

ACIT, CUDDALORE CIRCLE,, CUDDALORE vs. M/S. THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,, CUDDALORE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 703/CHNY/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: Shri K. Ravi, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36(1)(viia)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 703/Chny/2020 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) ACIT M/s. The Cuddalore Cuddalore Circle, District Central Co- बनाम/ Cuddalore. operative Bank Ltd., Vs. No. 1, Beach Road, Cuddalore. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAAAT-0209-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri M. Rajan, CIT ""थ" की…

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI

The appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1991/CHNY/2002[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2022AY 1993-94

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

For Appellant: Shri. C. Naresh (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80M

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ,ी महावीर िसंह, उपा23 एवं माननीय ,ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद: के सम3। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 782/Chny/2001 (िनधाCरणवषC / Assessment Year: 1992-93) & आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1991/Chny/2002 (िनधाCरणवषC / Assessment Year: 1993-94) Indian Overseas Bank JCIT बनाम/ Funds & Accounts Department, Special Range – I, 762, Anna Salai, Chennai. Vs. Chennai – 600 002. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAACI-1223-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""…

CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd.

What is CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. RPG Transmissions Ltd.

DCIT, CEN CIR 2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

DCIT, CC2(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. JAYAPRIYA COMPANY, CHENNAI

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. M/S CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE COMPANY LTD, CHENNAI

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. R R INDUSTRIES LIMITED, CHENNAI

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SOUTH CITY PROJECTS (KOLKATA) LIMITED, KOLKATA

ACIT LTU 2, CHENNAI vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK, CHENNAI

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. DCIT LTU-2, CHENNAI

DIVYANIDHI BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ACIT CIRCLE 5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED, MUMBAI

ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD., HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), HYD, HYDERABAD

DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), HYD, HYDERABAD vs. ECI ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD., HYD, HYDERABAD

DEPUTY CIT-5(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. M/S ESSAR SHIPPING LIMITED , MUMBAI

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

M/S. PVP VENTURES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

GMR AIR CARGO & AEROSPACE ENGINEERING LTD(SUCCESSOR TO GMR HYDERABAD AIR CARGO & LOGISTICS PVT LTD),SHAMSHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) , HYDERABAD

ACIT, CUDDALORE CIRCLE,, CUDDALORE vs. M/S. THE CUDDALORE DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,, CUDDALORE

INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, CHENNAI