How many judgments cite DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.?

18 judgments on BharatTax cite DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. (351 ITR 323), spanning 2016 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 145, Section 250, Section 36(1)(iii).

DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.

351 ITR 323High Court2013#6361 most cited

What is DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. authority for?

Interest accrues or arises only on the date specified in the instrument or agreement for its payment, not on any prior date, even if the creditor has a vested right to receive it in the future. An action filed for interest before the specified payment date is premature.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. · interest accrual · interest payment date · premature action · income tax · Bombay High Court · section 14A · section 115JB

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 115JB Section 143(3)Section 145 Section 250 Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 90(3)section 43d section 2(26)section 129(1)section 2(17)section 41(4)section 5(c)section 36(2)(v)section 194a(1)section 59 section 194a(3)section 43a

Judgments citing DIT v. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.

ACIT CIRCLE ,3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2119/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: \nShri C. NareshFor Respondent: \nShri Vikas K. Suryawanshi

Section 144Section 14A

…d by the\nCIT(A).\n8.3 We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities\nbelow. We find that an identical quarrel was decided by the Hon'ble\njurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston\n(Cyprus) Ltd. 351 ITR 323. The Hon'ble High Court held as under:\n“When an instrument or an agreement stipulates interest to be payable at a specified\ndate, interest does not accrue to the holder thereof on any date prior thereto. Interest\nwould accrue or arise only on the date specified in the instrument. That a creditor has\na vested right to receive interest on a sta…

ACIT, CIRCLE -3(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2118/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: \nShri C. NareshFor Respondent: \nShri Vikas K. Suryawanshi

Section 144Section 14A

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-(LTU) 2, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2038/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: \nShri C. NareshFor Respondent: \nShri Vikas K. Suryawanshi

Section 144Section 14A

M/S UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-(LTU)-2, MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2037/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

For Appellant: \nShri C. NareshFor Respondent: \nShri Vikas K. Suryawanshi

Section 144Section 14A

ACIT CIR 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. BANK OF BARODA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2777/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhailbank Of Baroda, C-26, G-Block, Baroda Corporate Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. ……………. Appellant Pan: Aaacb 1534 F V/S Acit, 2(1)(1), ……………. Respondent Mumbai-400051. Acit, Circle - 2(1)(1), Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ……………. Appellant Mumbai-400020. V/S Bank Of Baroda, C-26, G-Block, Baroda Corporate Centre, Bandra ……………. Respondent Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. Pan: Aaacb 1534 F

For Appellant: Mr. C. NareshFor Respondent: Mr. Kailash C. Kanojiya, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…acts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is correct deleting the addition on account of interest accrued but not due to the assessee following the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.(351 ITR 323) without appreciating the Assessing Officer's contention that deducting interest accrued but not due would tantamount to cash basis of accounting which is not permitted as per the provisions of section 145 of the IT Act, 1961. 3. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding that the Perpetua…

BANK OF BARODA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 2 (1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1649/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Mr. C. NareshFor Respondent: Mr. Kailash C. Kanojiya, CIT-DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…s & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is\ncorrect deleting the addition on account of interest accrued but not due to\nthe assessee following the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case\nof Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd.(351 ITR 323) without appreciating\nthe Assessing Officer's contention that deducting interest accrued but not\ndue would tantamount to cash basis of accounting which is not permitted as\nper the provisions of section 145 of the IT Act, 1961.\n3. \"On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) has erred in upholding that the Pe…

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…hat the issue arising here in stand concluded against revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee by the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in director of income tax (International taxation) versus Credit Suisse first Boston (Cyprus) Ltd (2013) 351 ITR 323. 71) Thus, respectfully following the decision of the honorable high court , on carefully consideration of the argument of the learned departmental representative, various examples given by the learned departmental representative, the accounting methodology applied by the assessee for revenue recognition of accrual, and also the method adopted b…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…he issue arising here in stand concluded against revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee by the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in director of income tax (International taxation) versus Credit Suisse first Boston (Cyprus) Ltd (2013) 351 ITR 323. 71) Thus, respectfully following the decision of the honorable high court , on carefully consideration of the argument of the learned departmental representative, various examples given by the learned departmental representative, the accounting methodology applied by the assessee for revenue recognition of accrual, and also the method ado…

M/S THE STATE BANK OF PATIALA,PATIALA vs. ACIT, PATIALA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 510/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15 & Assessment Year: 2015-16 The State Bank Of India Asst. Cit Circle-Patiala, (Successor To State Bank Of Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Patiala), Patiala-147001 Dgm & Cfo, Sbi, Local Head Office – Chandigarh, 2Nd Floor, Sector 17A, Chandigarh- 160017. Pan No. Aaccs 0143 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved & Mr. Ninadpatade, Ars Revenue By : Dr. Kishor Dhule, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 09/03/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/03/2023

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR

Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…ting year and, accordingly, it cannot be taxed in the accounting year and, accordingly, it cannot be taxed in the accounting year itself. In D accounting year itself. In DIT vs. Credit Suisse First Boston IT vs. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 323 (Bombay) Hon’ble (Cyprus) Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 323 (Bombay) Hon’ble (Cyprus) Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 323 (Bombay) Hon’ble Bombay High Court was concerned with a case wherein Bombay High Court was concerned with a case wherein Bombay High Court was concerned with a case wherein the tax officer had taxed interest accrued but not due on the tax officer h…

DCIT-2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S STATE BANK OF INDIA (SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 3033/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () I.T.A. No. 3033/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) I.T.A. No. 2873/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2015-16) Dcit-2(2)(1), Vs. M/S State Bank Of India Mumbai (Successor To State Room No. 545, Bank Of Bikaner & 5Th Floor, Ayakar Jaipur) Bhavan Financial Reporting & Mumbai-400020 Taxation, 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…est on securities arises on due date only, which falls after the accounting year and, accordingly, it cannot be taxed in the accounting year itself. In DIT vs. Credit Suisse First 30 State Bank of India ITA No. 3033/2873/Mum/2019 Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 323 (Bombay) Hon'ble Bombay High Court was concerned with a case wherein the tax officer had taxed interest accrued but not due on securities held as on 31st March. The Bombay High Court held that right to receive the interest vested only on the due date mentioned in the securities and, hence, the same cannot be taxed since interest was not payable o…

STATE BANK OF INDIA (SUCCESSOR TO STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR),MUMBAI vs. ACIT -CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, whereas the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purposes

ITA 2873/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Section 14A

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. PR.CIT, , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Desai (CA)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…s no right to charge interest which has not become due and payable. Also, the said treatment of excluding interest on bonds from Taxable Income is in accordance with the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in DIT -vs.- Credit Suisse First Boston Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 323 (Bom) wherein it has been held that right to receive interest in the government securities vested in the assessee only on the date mentioned in the securities. Consequently, 19 ITA 04/JP/2021_ Shree Cement Ltd. Vs Pr.CIT interest accrues on the securities only on the due dates and cannot be said to have accrued to the taxpayer on any date other…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&

Section 143(3)Section 147

…al and Bombay High Court. The right to receive interest on securities arises on due date only, which falls after the accounting year and, accordingly, it cannot be taxed in the accounting year itself. In DIT vs. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. [2013] 351 ITR 323 (Bombay) Hon’ble Bombay High Court was concerned with a case wherein the tax officer had taxed interest accrued but not due on securities held as on 31st March. The Bombay High Court held that right to receive the interest vested only on the due date mentioned in the securities and, hence, the same cannot be taxed since interest was not payable o…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM The ITO-23(1)(2) Vs. M/s. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road IL & FS Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 PAN/GIR No. AAAT16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The ITO-23(1)(2) Vs. M/s. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series III Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road IL & FS Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumba…

BANK OF BAHRAIN & KUWAIT B.S.C,MUMBAI vs. ADDL DIT (IT) 3, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2323/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2323/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year: 2008-09) Bank Of Bahrain & Kuwait Asst. Director Of Income Tax B.S.C. Jolly Maker Chambers Ii, (International Taxation) -3(2) 225, Nariman Point, Vs Mumbai. Mumbai – 400 021

For Appellant: Shri Farrokh V. Irani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 44C

…/Mum/2007 & ITA No.2323/Mum/2014 AYs. 2003-04 & 2008-09 Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait Vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax (IT)-3(2) of the assessee by the order of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of DIT Vs. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. (2013) 351 ITR 323 (Bom). As regards the deletion of an addition of Rs.61,21,073/- by the CIT(A), it was submitted by the ld. A.R that the „Ground of appeal No. 2‟ on the basis of which the said deletion had been assailed by the revenue was found to be misconceived. In order to fortify his aforesaid contention the ld. A.R took us through the observations of the CIT…

BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result the ground of appeal is treated as allowed

ITA 1013/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Amarjit Singhbank Of India A C I T - 2(1) C-5, G Block, Star House Aayakar Bhavan 8Th Floor, Taxation Deptt. Vs. M.K Road Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent D C I T - 2(1) Bank Of India Room No. 561, 5Th Floor C-5, G Block, Star House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K Road Vs. 8Th Floor, Taxation Deptt. Mumbai 400020 Bkc, Bandra (E) Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri C. Naresh Revenue By: Shri Purushottam Tripuri Date Of Hearing: 09.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.08.2018 O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, Am These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee & Revenue Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-4, Mumbai Dated 27.11.2012 For A.Y. 2005-06 In The Matter Of Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Tripuri

Section 10Section 10(33)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…sion for wage arrears. 29. Ground No. 7 relates to deletion of disallowance of interest accrued but not due on securities. 30. We found that this issue is also decided by the Hon'ble High Court in the case of DIT vs. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. 351 ITR 323 and also in the case of CITG vs. Indus Bank 373 ITR 170. The SLP filed against this order by the Department has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Federal Bank Ltd. 310 ITR 9. Respectfully following the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and other Hon'ble High Courts as referred above, we do not find any reason to inte…

ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIZATION TRUST 2008 SERIES 14I, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 4343/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Goasinindian Corporate Loan Securitisation Income Tax Officer-9(3)(2) Trust- 2008 Series 14 Mumbai C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent Income Tax Officer-(23)1)(2) Indian Corporate Loan [Erstwhile Ito-19(3)(2)] Securitisation Trust- 2008 Series 14 Room No. 108, Matru Mandir Vs. C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Tardeo Road, Grant Road 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Mumbai 400007 Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur &For Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray

…st for the month of March, 2009 cannot be said to have accrued in the financial year 2008-09 relevant to A.Y. 2009-10. In support of this proposition, reliance was placed in the case of DIT (International Taxation) vs. Credit Suisse First Boston (Cyprus) Ltd. 351 ITR 323 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of E.D. Sasson & Co. Ltd. 26 ITR 27, 52 (SC), held that when an instrument or an agreement stipulates interest to be payable on a specified date, interest does not accrue to the assessee on any date prior thereto. In view of the above,…

DCIT - 3(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA FINANCE LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 799/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Sanjay Araora & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2003-04 Deupty Commissioner Of Income Kotak Mahendra Capital Co. Ltd Tax ,-3(2), Room No.68,6Th Floor, Bakthwar,1St Floor, 229, Nariman Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai Point, Mumbai-21 Pan Aaack5577D

Section 14Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

…and that order of CIT(A) be reversed. AR for assessee is argued that this Ground of appeal is covered in his favour by the decision of Bombay High Court in CIT Vs Bank of Rajasthan 326 ITR 525(Bom) and in DIT(IT) Versus Credit Suisee First Boston(Cyprus) Ltd 351 ITR 323 , and further by the decision of Kerala High Court in CIT versus Federal bank Ltd 301 ITR 188(Ker). We have gone through the various decisions relied by ld AR of the assessee and considered the ratio laid down therein. In CIT versus bank of Rajasthan the jurisdictional High Court while considering the identical ground held as under “Insofar as t…