CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.

231 ITR 285Supreme Court of India1998#1413 most cited

What is CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. authority for?

The actual cost of an asset is distinct from the cost of borrowing money for its purchase. Foreign exchange fluctuations on loan repayment do not alter the asset's actual cost and are not covered by Section 43A.

81

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. · 231 ITR 285 · Section 43A · Section 43(1) · actual cost of asset · foreign exchange fluctuation · cost of borrowing · loan repayment · depreciation basis · independent transactions

Also reported as

99 Taxmann 459

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 37(1)Section 14ASection 43ASection 115JBSection 143(3)Section 43(1)Section 145

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)(a)section 207section 10(2a)waiver of loansection 43asection 94section 211section 43(1)section 145(2)minimum alternate taxsection 38section 155

Judgments citing CIT v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. India Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/49/2005HC Delhi30 Apr 2007

…n the decisions in CIT -vs- Indian Overseas Bank, 151 ITR 446, Indian Molasses Company -vs- CIT, 37 ITR 66 (SC), CIT -vs- Nainital Bank Ltd., 62 ITR 638, CIT -vs- Kamini Metal and Alloys, 208 ITR 1017 (Bombay), CIT -vs- Tata Iron and Steel Company, 231 ITR 285 (SC). 6 O b h lf f h h b i i d 2007:DHC:406 (a) In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arvind Mills followed by this Court in IFFCO and Paper Products, the question of increase in liability on capital account as a result of foreign exchange fluctuation is fully settled in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. I…