CIT v. Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria

PIYUSH SUBHASH WADHWA,MUMBAI vs. CIT(APPEAL), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarpiyush Subhash Wadhwa V/S. Commissioner Of Income 64, Ashirwad Icici बनाम Tax (Appeal)National Apartments, Gd Ambekar Appeal Faceless Centre, Marg, Naigaon Dadar(E), Delhi Mumbai – 400 014, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aagpw3024N Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

…gly, had incurred the net loss in such loan transactions. In this regard, reliance has been P a g e | 10 A.Y. 2016-17 Piyush Subhash Wadhwa placed on various judicial decision i.e.CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody115 ITR 519 (SC),CIT v. Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria 319 ITR 413 (Bom- HC),Seth R. Dalmia v. CIT, Delhi 110 ITR 644 (SC),CIT v. Darashaw & Co. Pvt. Ltd. -ITA No. 2627 and 2628 of 2011 (Bom-HC),CIT v. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. -ITA No. 138 of 2003 (Bom-HC) etc. 7. The ld.DR on the other hand placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below contenting further that no purpose for loan given to builder was…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. HITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: adverting to the merits, it is necessary to record that Ground No. 1 raised in the cross-objection was expressly stated to be not pressed by the learned counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 of the cross-objection is dismissed as not pressed. The adjudication hereinafter is, therefore, confined exclusively to Ground No. 2 of the cross- objection, which pertains to the allowability of interest expenditure under section 57 of the Act. 4. Briefly stated, th

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT u/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, Le wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the 8 ITA No.7865/Mum/2025 & CO No.400/Mum/2025 Hitesh Shantilal Mehta taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and th…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. HITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT u/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, Le wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisdic…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. HITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: the Tribunal, as stipulated under CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024. It was also not the case of the Revenue that the present appeals fall within any of the exceptions carved out in the said Circular. In view of this admitted position and having regard to the binding nature of the Circular, which expressly applies even to pending appeals, the maintainability of the Revenue's appeals stands squarely governed by the said Circular. 3

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT u/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, Le wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisdic…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. HITESH SHANTILAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, the cross-objections filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: the Tribunal, as stipulated under CBDT Circular No.09/2024 dated 17.09.2024. It was also not the case of the Revenue that the present appeals fall within any of the exceptions carved out in the said Circular. In view of this admitted position and having regard to the binding nature of the Circular, which expressly applies even to pending appeals, the maintainability of the Revenue's appeals stands squarely governed by the said Circular. 3

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT u/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, Le wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisdic…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. PRATIMA HITESH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue in A

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, l.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(lil) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. PRATIMA HITESH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue in A

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, l.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(lil) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KAUTILYA BHAWAN vs. PRATIMA HITESH MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by revenue in A

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Smt. Renu Jauhri

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, l.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(lil) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

PRATIMA HITESH MEHTA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC -4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 1992-1993 Pratima Hitesh Mehta Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 32, Madhuli Apartment, Income-Tax, Cc -4(1), 3Rd Floor, Dr. A.B Road, Worli, Mumbai Mumbai - 400018 [Pan: Abnpm8226G] Appellant Respondent Present For: Appellant By : Shri Dharmesh Shah & Ms. Mitali Parekh, Advocates Respondent By : Dr. P. Daniel (Special Counsel For Dept.) Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 17.10.2025 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Cit(A)-52, Mumbai, Vide Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070774879(1), Dated 29.11.2025 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Cc-4(1), Mumbai, U/S. 144 R.W.S. 254 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 19.07.2024 For Assessment Year 1992-93. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Fact In Partly Confirming The Assessment Order Passed U/S. 144 R.W.S. 254 Of The Act Dated 19.07.2024. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & In Fact In Not Quashing The Assessment Order Which Is Time Barred & Hence Void.

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, l.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(lil) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT-31, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

GROWMORE LEASING AND INVESTMENTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT-31, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

SUDHIR S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT,CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT, CC -31), MUMBAI

In the result, ground no. 6 raised by the assessee is allowed

…t\nthe connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and\neven an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the\nincome. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413\n(Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under\nsection 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the\npurpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market\nand the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

RASILA S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), (ERSTWHILE ACIT, CC-23), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that\nof the revenue are dismissed

…nditure incurred and the\n\nआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण\nINCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL\nI.T.A. No. 380/Mum/2023\nI.T.A. No. 1181/Mum/2023\nI.T.A. No. 462/Mum/2023\nI.T.A. No. 1182/Mum/2023\n18\nincome. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413\n(Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under\nsection 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the\npurpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market\nand the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

RASILA S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that\nof the revenue are dismissed

…t\nthe connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even\nan indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the\nincome. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413\n(Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under\nsection 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the\npurpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market\nand the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN.CIRCLE-4(1), MUMBAI vs. SMT. RASILA S. MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that\nof the revenue are dismissed

…t\nthe connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even\nan indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the\nincome. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413\n(Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under\nsection 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the\npurpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market\nand the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

SUDHIR S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the\nrevenue is dismissed

…t the connection between the expenditure and the earning of\nincome need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus\nbetween the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s\nSmt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix,\ni.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on\nthe basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning\nincome as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the\ndividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CEN.CIRCLE-4(1), MUMBAI vs. SHRI SUDHIR SHANTILAL MEHTA, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the\nrevenue is dismissed

…t the connection between the expenditure and the earning of\nincome need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus\nbetween the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s\nSmt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix,\ni.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on\nthe basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning\nincome as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the\ndividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble ju…

GROWMORE RESEARCH AND ASSETS MANAGEMENT ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT-31, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…

LANXES INDIA P.LTD,THANE vs. ASST CIT CIR 1, THANE

In the result, both the appeals are treated as partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

…that the connection between the expenditure and the earning of income need not be direct, and even an indirect connection could prove the nexus between the expenditure incurred and the income. We further find that in CIT v/s Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria, [2009] 319 ITR 413 (Bom.), in a similar factual matrix, i.e. wherein the AO denied the deduction claimed under section 57(iii) of the Act on the basis that the expenditure was not incurred wholly for the purpose of earning income as the taxpayer was engaged in selling shares in the stock market and the dividend income had accrued as a by-product, the Hon'ble jurisd…