DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd.

298 ITR 194Supreme Court of India2008#592 most cited

What is DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. authority for?

Interest expenditure incurred for acquiring capital assets, even if capitalized in the books, is deductible if for the purpose of business. Section 36(1)(iii) is a self-contained code regarding such deductions.

165

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,842 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. · section 36(1)(iii) · interest expenditure · capital asset · business purpose · capitalized interest · revenue expenditure · deduction · tax law

Also reported as

167 Taxmann 206

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 142(2A)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(2)(b)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 40(3)short deduction of tdsinterest on interestclosely held companyshort deduction of taxaccumulated profitsrelated party transactiondisallowance of interest expendituresection 142(2a)section 194jsection 40a(2)(b)section 14a(2)

Judgments citing DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd.

Sjs Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 660/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)

…ies. We find that during the year the assessee company’s bankers released additional terms loan totaling to Rs.54,85,000 for acquiring new machinery to enhance productivity and manufacturing capacities. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Core Health Care Ltd., 298 ITR 194 (SC) has held that section 36(1)(iii) of the Act ITA No.680 & 660/Bang/2014 Page 25 of 26 makes no distinction between money borrowed to obtain a capital asset or a revenue asset; all that is required is that the assessee must borrow capital and the purpose of borrowing must be for business which is carried on by the assessee in the year of acc…

Narasu'S Spinning Mills, Salem vs. ACIT, Salem

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 957/CHNY/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Dec 2015AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.957/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 M/S Narasu’S Spinning Mills, The Assistant Commissioner Of 9-E, Gandhi Road, V. Income Tax, Salem – 636 007. Circle –I(2), 3, Gandhi Road, Salem-636 007. Pan : Aabfn 5747 L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Section 194ASection 40

…6 I.T.A. No.957/Mds/15 The Ld.counsel placed his reliance on the decision of Ahmedabad Bench of this Tribunal in Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v. ACIT (2013) 140 ITD 603 and the judgment of Apex Court in DCIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 194. 7. On the contrary, Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act, which is very much applicable during the year under consideration, clearly says that when the assessee borrowed funds for acquisition of asset, whether it is capitalized in the books of account or not. The interest paid…

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Calcutta Mumbai Truck Terminal Ltd, Howrah

Accordingly, the ground no. 2 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1189/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri R.S Sahay, FCA,, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT,ld.DR
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member, and Before : Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A Nos. 1189 & 1190/Kol/2012 A.Ys 2007-08 & 2009-10 D.C.I.T, Circle-1, Kolkata Vs. M/s. Calcutta Mumbai Truck Terminal Ltd. PAN: AABCC 0747Q (Appellant/Department) (Respondent/Assessee) I.T.A No. 736/Kol/2011 A.Y 2008-09 I.T.O Ward 1(3), Kolkata Vs. M/s. Calcutta Mumbai Truck Terminal Pvt.Ltd. PAN: AABCC 0747Q (Appellant/Department) (Respondent/Assessee) For the Appellant/Department: Shri Sanjay Mukherjee, JCIT,ld.DR For the Respondent/ Assessee:…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dlf Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4344/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. C. M. Garg, Jm Ita No. 4344/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Dcit, Vs M/S Dlf Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. Circle-10(1), 1-E, Naaz Cinema Complex, New Delhi Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabch8735M Assessee By : Sh. R. S. Singvi, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2015 Order Per N.K. Saini, A.M. This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 24.05.2012 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-Xiii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. Singvi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Parwinder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 4Section 5A

…d. 297 ITR 303 (Del) " CIT Vs Sarabhai Management Corpn. Ltd. (1991) 192 ITR 151 " Whirlpool of India Ltd. Vs JCIT (2008) 19 SOT 593 " CIT Vs Sponge Iron Ltd. 201 ITR 770, 780 (AP) " M/s Club Resorts Pvt. Ltd. 287 ITR 552 (Mad) " DCIT Vs Core Health Care Ltd. 298 ITR 194 (2008) (SC) 7. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee deleted the addition made by the AO by observing in para 4.3 of the impugned order as under: “4.3 I have considered the observation of the Assessing Officer and submission of the appellant. It is seen that the appellant company was incorporated on 09.04.2007 and as pe…

M/S Embassy Development Corporation vs. The Assistant Commissioner

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/465/2009HC Karnataka08 Sept 2015

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 43D

…ITR 723 (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY CITY II v/s BOMBAY SAMACHAR LTD., BOMBAY); (3) (1979) 118 ITR 200 (MADHAV PRASAD JATIA v/s COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, U.P.); (4) (2008) 298 ITR 194 (SC) (DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX v/s CORE HEALTH CARE LTD.); and (5) (1965) 56 ITR 77 (SC) (COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS v/s INDIAN BANK LIMITED.) 5. On the other hand, Sri.K.V.Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue argued in support of the order p…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat Hotels Limited

The appeal is disposed of

ITA-62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015
Section 36Section 43(1)

…referred to the decisions in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Modi Industries Ltd. (1993) 200 ITR 341 (Del), Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Monnet Industries Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 627 (Del) and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Core Health Care Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 194 (SC). He submitted that in terms of Section 36 (1) (iii), during the AY in question, the Assessee was entitled to treat the expenditure incurred in payment of interest on loans borrowed for the expansion of the existing business as revenue expenditure. 9. The decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Monnet Industries Lt…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bharat Hotels Limited

The appeal is disposed of

ITA/62/2007HC Delhi31 Jul 2015
Section 36Section 43(1)

…referred to the decisions in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Modi Industries Ltd. (1993) 200 ITR 341 (Del), Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Monnet Industries Ltd. (2011) 332 ITR 627 (Del) and Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Core Health Care Ltd. (2008) 298 ITR 194 (SC). He submitted that in terms of Section 36 (1) (iii), during the AY in question, the Assessee was entitled to treat the expenditure incurred in payment of interest on loans borrowed for the expansion of the existing business as revenue expenditure. 9. The decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Monnet Industries Lt…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) - III vs. M/S Dd Industries Ltd

ITA - 518 / 2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/S Dd Industries Ltd

ITA - 516 / 2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) - III vs. M/S Dd Industries Ltd

ITA - 512 / 2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/518/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/516/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/519/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/526/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/517/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C) -III vs. M/s Dd Industries Ltd

ITA/512/2013HC Delhi13 Mar 2015
Section 36

…ITA Nos.512/2013, 516/2013, 517/2013, 518/2013, 519/2013 & 526/2013 Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Decided On: 13.03.2015 + ITA No.512/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal with Mr. Ravin Pratap, Advocates. AND + ITA No.516/2013 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (C) -III ..... Appellant Through: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel, Advocate. Versus M/s DD INDUSTRIES…

Shri Maneklal Agarwal vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income tax

ITTA/390/2010HC Telangana25 Feb 2015

Bench: A RAMALINGESWARA RAO,DILIP B. BHOSALE

DCIT vs. Ing Vysya Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the 68

ITA 318/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ing Vysya House, Income Tax, No.22, M.G. Road, Circle 11(4), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan: Aabct 0529M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Income Tax, Bangalore – 560 001. Circle 11(4), Pan: Aabct 0529M Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A. Revenue By : Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT-I(DR)
Section 1Section 10Section 234D

…submission was that the asset in question is land which is not a depreciable asset and therefore Explanation 8 to section 43(1) of the Act will not be applicable at all. Secondly, it was submitted, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Corehealth Care Ltd. 298 ITR 194 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowings for acquisition of asset which are not put to use should also be allowed as a revenue expenditure u/s. ITA No.288 & 318/Bang/2013 Page 30 of 50 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The law has, however, been amended by inserting a proviso to section 36(1)(iii) of the Act by the Fina…

Ing Vysya Bank Ltd vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed while the 68

ITA 288/BANG/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeassessment Year : 2005-06 M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Ing Vysya House, Income Tax, No.22, M.G. Road, Circle 11(4), Bangalore – 560 001. Bangalore. Pan: Aabct 0529M Appellant Respondent Assessment Year : 2005-06 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Ing Vysya Bank Ltd., Income Tax, Bangalore – 560 001. Circle 11(4), Pan: Aabct 0529M Bangalore. Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri S. Ananthan, C.A. Revenue By : Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, Cit-I(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.02.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT-I(DR)
Section 1Section 10Section 234D

…submission was that the asset in question is land which is not a depreciable asset and therefore Explanation 8 to section 43(1) of the Act will not be applicable at all. Secondly, it was submitted, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Corehealth Care Ltd. 298 ITR 194 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that interest paid on borrowings for acquisition of asset which are not put to use should also be allowed as a revenue expenditure u/s. ITA No.288 & 318/Bang/2013 Page 30 of 50 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The law has, however, been amended by inserting a proviso to section 36(1)(iii) of the Act by the Fina…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - Central vs. M/s. Himagiri Biotech Pvt. Ltd

ITTA/526/2013HC Telangana30 Oct 2013