CIT v. Smt. Sushila Devi Khadaria

Deepika A. Mehta, Mumbi vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआ.अ.सं.379/मुं/2023 (नि.व. 1992-93) Ιτα No.379/Mum/2023 (A.Y.1992-93) Smt. Deepika A Mehta 32, Madhuli, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 Pan: Abnpm8231D अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम Vs. The Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cen.Circle-4(1), Mumbai-400 021 प्रतिवादी/Respondent आ.अ.सं. 1178/मुं/2023 (नि.व. 1992-93)

…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…

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cen-Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Smt. Deepika A. Mehta, Mumbai

In the result appeal of Department is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalआ.अ.सं.379/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 1992-93) Smt. Deepika A Mehta 32, Madhuli, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Abnpm8231D बनाम Vs.

…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…

ITO 28 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gahlot Construction, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue & CO of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran, Am & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) Ito-28(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Gahlot Construction Room No. 329, Tower No. Plot No-28A, Gahlot Vs. 6, 3Rd Floor, Vashi Railway Complex, Sector-10, Station, Navi Mumbai- Nerul, Navi Mumbai- 400703. 400703. Cross Objection No. 82/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Gahlot Construction बिधम/ Ito-28(1)(1) Plot No-28A, Gahlot Room No. 329, Tower Vs. No. 6, 3Rd Floor, Vashi Complex, Sector-10, Nerul, Navi Mumbai-400703. Railway Station, Navi Mumbai-400703. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaofm5698J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Ritika Agarwal Revenue By: Shri Raj Singh Meel (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/01/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue; & The Assessee Has Filed A Cross Objection (Co) Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Dated 30.10.2021 For The Ay. 2008-09. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Deleting The Addition Of Rs.5 Cr Which Was Added By The

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI BR BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T. A. No. 2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) ITO-28(1)(1) बिधम/ M/s. Gahlot Construction Room No. 329, Tower No. Plot No-28A, Gahlot Vs. 6, 3rd Floor, Vashi Railway Complex, Sector-10, Station, Navi Mumbai- Nerul, Navi Mumbai- 400703. 400703. Cross Objection No. 82/Mum/2023 Arising out of I.T.A. No.2475/Mum/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/s. Gahlot Construction बिधम/ ITO-28(1)(1) Plot No-28A, Gahlot Room No. 329, Tower Vs. No. 6, 3rd Floor, Vashi Com…

Smt. Jyoti H Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT, CC-4(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Gagan Goyaljyoti H. Mehta 32, Madhuli Apartment, 3Rd Floor, Dr. A. B. Road, Worli, Mumbai-400 018 Pan: Abnpm8233B ..... Appellant Vs. Acit Circle 4(1) R. No. 1916, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai ..... Respondent

…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…

Pratima Hitesh Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the present cross-appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…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…

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Cent -Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. Smt Pratima H. Mehta, Mumbai

In the result, the present cross-appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…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…

Essar House Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (Cir) 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ravish Soodassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Essar House Ltd., Asst Cit (Cir) 6(2)(2), Essar House, R.No.504, 5Th Floor, 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mahalaxmi, M.K. Road, Mumbai – 400 034 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacj2883P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R. Revenue By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.12.2020 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 31.01.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] Relevant To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Various Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. The Cit (A) Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Interest Amount Payable Towards Defeasance Of Sales Tax Liability Amounting To Rs.226,07,45,800. 2. The Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That Interest Liability Cannot Be Treated As Expenditure Incurred For The Purpose Of Earning Or Making Income By Way Of Discounting Charges On The Zero Coupon Bonds (Zcbs) & Consequently , The Same Is Not Eligible For Deduction U/S 57(Iii) Of The Act Against The Income By Way Of Discounting Charges On Zcbs. 3. The Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Transaction Is Not A Bonafide In Nature & Interest Liability Was Arisen From Adoption Of A Colorable Device By The Appellant For Avoidance Of Tax.

…gible for deduction u/s.57(lii) of the Act. The appellant placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rejendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 590, decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smt Sushiia Devi Khadaria 319 ITR 413 and the decisions of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Vodafone South Ltd. Vs. CIT 61 taxmann.com 415 and Taj International Jewellers 20 taxmann.com 1 in support of its contention. The appellant also pointed out that this issue has been decided by the Crr(A) in favour of the appellant in the appellate orders passed in the case of the a…