CIT v. Trishul Investments Ltd.

305 ITR 434High Court2008#4498 most cited

What is CIT v. Trishul Investments Ltd. authority for?

Interest paid on loans borrowed for the purpose of investment in shares is allowed as part of the cost of acquisition eligible for deduction while computing capital gains under Section 48. The intention of the assessee at the time of acquisition of shares determines the nature of the gain.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Trishul Investments Ltd. · Section 48 · cost of acquisition · interest on borrowed funds · shares · capital gains · period of holding · speculative transaction · intention of assessee

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 48Section 115JBSection 250Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 71(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 43(5)speculative transactionshort term capital gainsperiod of holdingsection 10(34)short term capital gainsection 48section 45section 271brule of consistencysection 36(1)(iii)disallowance under section 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Trishul Investments Ltd.

Navinchandra N . Majithia, Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2830/MUM/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2016AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 1999-2000 Shri Navinchandra N. Income Tax Officer-9(2)(1) Majithia, Aayakar Bhavan, बनाम/ 304, Kedia Chambers, M.K. Road, Vs. Near New Era Cinema, Mumbai-400020 S.V. Road, Malad (W), Mumbai-400064 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aaepm6435F "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By M/S. Keyuri Desai Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar,Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By 16/11/2016 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18/11/2016 आदेश क" तार"ख /Date Of Order:

…is always to earn the profit and not a loss, therefore, this contention of the ld. Assessing Officer cannot be said to be justified. We find that the case of the assessee is covered in his favour by the ratio laid down in CIT vs Trishul Investment Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 434 (Mad.), CIT vs Ramamirtham (2008) 306 ITR 239 (Mad.), CIT vs N.S. S. Investment Pvt. Ltd. 277 ITR 149 (Mad.), CIT vs Jubilant Security Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 333 ITR 445 (Del.), Janak S. Rangwala vs ACIT 11 SOT 627 (Mum.), Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer (2008) 5 DTR (Mum) 29 Shri Navinchandra N. Majithia 401, CIT vs Gopal Purohit (2011) 33…

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5159/MUM/2010[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…e determined on the basis of well-established commercial principles and only the 'real income' so commercially determined can be subjected to tax. 11. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Trishul Investment Ltd. 305 ITR 434 in support of the proposition that deduction on account of interest liability of borrowings made to acquire the shares is to be considered. Ld. AR further submitted that SLP filed against the order of Madras High Court was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which was reported at 306 ITR (St.) 4. 12. Reliance was also placed by ld. AR on some of t…

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5158/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…e determined on the basis of well-established commercial principles and only the 'real income' so commercially determined can be subjected to tax. 11. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Trishul Investment Ltd. 305 ITR 434 in support of the proposition that deduction on account of interest liability of borrowings made to acquire the shares is to be considered. Ld. AR further submitted that SLP filed against the order of Madras High Court was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which was reported at 306 ITR (St.) 4. 12. Reliance was also placed by ld. AR on some of t…

Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Mumbai vs. ACIT Crn Cir 34, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of assessee are dismissed

ITA 5157/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita No.5157 To 5159/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2006-07 To 2008-09) Dr. Narendra D. Desai, Vs. Acit, Cc-34, Mumbai Apar House, Corporate Park, Building No.5, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai- 400071 स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aacpd 5020 B (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By Shri N.P.Singh : सुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 31/03/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 11/05/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-Mumbai, For The Assessment Years 2006-07 To 2008-09, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153A Of The Act. 2. Common Grievance Of The Assessee In All The Years Pertains To Disallowance Of Claim Of Management Fees While Computing Short Term Capital Gain U/S.48 Of The I.T.Act. 3. Rival Contentions Have Been Heard & Record Perused. Facts In Brief Are That Assessee Is An Individual, Shown Income Under The Head Short Term Capital Gain. While Computing The Same Assessee Has Claimed

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 48Section 55

…e determined on the basis of well-established commercial principles and only the 'real income' so commercially determined can be subjected to tax. 11. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Trishul Investment Ltd. 305 ITR 434 in support of the proposition that deduction on account of interest liability of borrowings made to acquire the shares is to be considered. Ld. AR further submitted that SLP filed against the order of Madras High Court was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court which was reported at 306 ITR (St.) 4. 12. Reliance was also placed by ld. AR on some of t…

ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Manimaya Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 439/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri Sallong yaden, Addl.CIT,Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Subash Agarwal, Advocate

…old similar commodity as investment. The Hon’ble Court held that one has to gather the intention of the persons holding a commodity. Thereafter the CIT(A)referred to the decisions of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Trishul Investments Ltd. 305 ITR 434 for the proposition that purchase of shares out of borrowed funds on which interest was paid cannot be the basis to decide that the shares so purchased were to be reckoned as stock in trade of business carried out by the assessee. CIT(A) relied on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of S Rangwala vs ACIT 11 SOT 627 (Mum) for the proposition t…

Firestone Trading P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby treated as allowed

ITA 886/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2006-07 M/S. Firestone Trading Pvt. The Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income-Tax, C/O. Karnavat & Co., Central Circle – 39, Vs. 2A Kitab Mahal, 1St Floor, Ground Floor, 192 Dr. D.N. Road, Aayakar Bhawan, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacf 3313J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Sunil Hirawat, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sanjeev Kashyap, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 30.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.01.2016

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Hirawat, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap, D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 48

…Ground No. 1 is allowed." 5. In the case of Wood Stock Broking P. Ltd. (supra) the identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal and following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs. Trishul Investments Ltd. 305 ITR 434 held that the interest paid on the money borrowed for acquiring the shares on which the assessee paid the interest which partakes the character of the cost of the shares. We, therefore, hold that the interest paid by the assessee on the money borrowed for IPO application is part of cost of acquisition and the same is to be allowed. We, therefore,…