CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.

Thiru Thaanigai Spinning Mills Private Limited, Coimbatore vs. ITO Corporate Ward 4, Coimbatore

In the result, the Ground No

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.595/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14

…tances, the Pune Bench of this Tribunal found that the loss claimed by the assessee on account of foreign exchange fluctuation is allowable under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The Pune Bench, 3 I.T.A. No.595/Chny/18 (1998) 231 ITR 285. The Ld. representative has also placed his reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P.) Ltd. (2009) 312 ITR 254 and submitted that this judgment relates to assessment year 1998-99. According to the Ld. representative, Accounting Standard – 11 came into effect from the year 2013, therefore, the Apex Court had n…

The Madras Silks India Pvt. Ltd., Tiruppur vs. DCIT, Tiruppur

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

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 180/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Madras Silks India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 68-A, College Road, Vs. Income Tax, Tirupur 641 602. Circle 1, Tirupur. [Pan: Aacct4954H] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Swaminathan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Asish Tripathi, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2017 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Coimbatore Dated 27.10.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Foreign Exchange Fluctuation Loss On Principal Repayment Of Wind Mill Loan.

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘‘सी’’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी धु"वु" आर.एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" Before Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I T.A. No. 180/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2012-13 The Madras Silks India Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of No. 68-A, College Road, Vs. Income Tax, Tirupur 641 602. Circle 1, Tirupur. [PAN: AACCT4954H] (Appellant) (Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Swaminathan, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Asi…

Iljin Automotive Private Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

…for payment of its cost, i.e., a period cost. Where, and to the extent inconsistent with s. 43(1), defining ‘actual cost’, it is the latter that shall hold. Reference in this context may also be made to the decision in CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. [1998] 231 ITR 285 (SC), wherein it was held that the cost of an asset and the cost of raising money for its purchase are two different and independent transactions. The manner and mode of repayment of a loan had nothing to do with the cost of an asset acquired by the assessee for the purpose of his business. The Apex court was speaking in context of a loan/borrowi…

Bahwan Cybertek Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.290/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

…entitled to the loss suffered during the relevant year, i.e., with reference to the change from the end of the immediately preceding year to the current year-end. Support for this may also be drawn from the decision in CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. [1998] 231 ITR 285 (SC). The AO shall decide after determining this aspect. We decide accordingly. Grounds 17 & 18 are partly allowed. Part D: (9) Gd. 19 challenges the levy of interest u/s. 234A in-as-much as the return, filed electronically on 21.11.2012, is in time, so that no interest there- under, which is only for the late filing of the return, could be levi…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Emerald Resilient Tyre Manufactures Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the Revenue appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri. G. Pavan Kumar

…t be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overruthng provismns of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the & case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motors India Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

…ot be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overriding provisions of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motor India Ltd., Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

…ot be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overriding provisions of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

…ot be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overriding provisions of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…

Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

…ot be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overriding provisions of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Hyundai Motor India Limited, Kancheepuram

In the result, while CO of the assessee is dismissed, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed in the terms indicated above, all the three appeals filed by the revenue are dis...

…ot be bracketed with cost of acquisition of capital assets save and except in terms of overriding provisions of S. 43A of the Act. 10.6 We also simultaneously note here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. (1998) 22 ITR 285 held that cost of an asset and cost of raising money for purchase of asset are two different and independent transactions. Thus, events subsequent to acquisition of assets cannot change price paid for it. Therefore, fluctuations in foreign exchange rate while repaying installments of foreign loan raised to acquire asset cannot alter actual cost of…