CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan

248 ITR 449Supreme Court of India2001#1715 most cited

What is CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan authority for?

Interest paid on a loan taken against the security of a fixed deposit cannot be set off against or reduced from the interest income earned on that fixed deposit. The Income-tax Act does not permit such netting.

66

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan · 248 ITR 449 · Section 57 · deductibility of interest · loan against fixed deposit · interest income on fixed deposit · netting of interest · income from other sources · set-off of interest · interest on loan against FD

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57Section 57(iii)Section 11Section 12Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

tax recovery officersection 57(iii)section 36(1)(ii)section 51section 57interest free advancesmistake apparent from recordcomputer softwaresection 10aacommercial expediencysection 10asection 36(1)(iii)

Judgments citing CIT v. V.P. Gopinathan

M/S. Imc Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 813/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…guarantee to show that those were taken for the purpose of assessee’s business. It is also not clear at what time the FDR were made whether those were made at the time of bank guarantee or some other time. Ld. DR relied in the case of CIT Vs. V.P. Gopinathan 248 ITR 479 and CIT Vs. Shri Ram Honda Power Equip & Ors 289 ITR 475 and he supported the assessment order. On the other hand, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has to participate in various tenders for which bank guarantee is very much required. Therefore, FDR was made so that assessee could obtain the bank guarantee. He in support of assessee…

DCIT, Circle - 11, Kolkata vs. M/S. Imc Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 781/KOL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Jan 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…guarantee to show that those were taken for the purpose of assessee’s business. It is also not clear at what time the FDR were made whether those were made at the time of bank guarantee or some other time. Ld. DR relied in the case of CIT Vs. V.P. Gopinathan 248 ITR 479 and CIT Vs. Shri Ram Honda Power Equip & Ors 289 ITR 475 and he supported the assessment order. On the other hand, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that assessee has to participate in various tenders for which bank guarantee is very much required. Therefore, FDR was made so that assessee could obtain the bank guarantee. He in support of assessee…

M/S Farmers Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd., Koppa vs. ITO, Mysore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year

ITA 727/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Aug 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan, Jm (Smc)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT
Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JM (SMC) ITA No.727(B)/2015 (Assessment year : 2009-10) M/s Farmers Agricultural Credit Co-OP.Society Ltd. Formerly known as Syndicate Rythara Sahakara Bank Ltd, Koppa, Periyapatna TQ. Mysore District PAN No.AAABS0118D Appellant Vs The Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Mysore Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suresh Muthukrishnan, CA Revenue by : Dr. P.K.Srihari, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 18-08-2015 Date of pronouncement : 26-08-2015 O R D E R PER SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JM: This appeal by the assessee is d…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Uk Bose

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA-258/2010HC Delhi30 Nov 2012
Section 17Section 28

…rovisions. He referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Dr. V.P.Gopinathan 2012:DHC:7142-DB ITA Nos.258, 546 & 942 of 2010 Page 11 of 18 (2001) 248 ITR 449 and held that the gross interest of `17,87,426/- was assessable to tax and the same was brought to charge under the head “income from other sources”. 18. On appeal the CIT (Appeals) agreed with the assessee and directed the assessing officer to allow the interest payment of `10,12,529/- and to assess only the balance of `7,74,897/-. Hi…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Uk Bose

In the result all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA/258/2010HC Delhi30 Nov 2012
Section 17Section 28

…ion under those provisions. He referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Dr. V.P.Gopinathan ITA Nos.258, 546 & 942 of 2010 Page 11 of 18 (2001) 248 ITR 449 and held that the gross interest of `17,87,426/- was assessable to tax and the same was brought to charge under the head “income from other sources”. 18. On appeal the CIT (Appeals) agreed with the assessee and directed the assessing officer to allow the interest payment of `10,12,529/- and to assess only the balance of `7,74,897/-. Hi…

Commissioner of Income Tax-V N vs. Damanjit Singh

ITA/166/2000HC Delhi12 Jan 2007

…s income from other sources. The decision in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilisers, which was rendered in the context of Sections 56 and 57, has been followed in CIT v. Auto Kast Ltd. (2001) 248 ITR 110 (SC). Likewise, in CIT v. Dr. V.Gopinathan (2001) 248 ITR 449 (SC) interest on fixed deposits was held not to qualify for setting off against interest on loans borrowed. The other 2007:DHC:9-DB decisions on the same lines, in the context of Section 80HHC are CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 and Pandian Chemicals (2003) 262 ITR 278 (SC). In these decisions, the Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterate…