Dy. CIT v. Core Health Care Ltd.

298 ITR 1941Reported decision2008#24292 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2022.

Judgments citing Dy. CIT v. Core Health Care Ltd.

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Jath Wind Energy Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1321/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit,Circle-2(1) Vs. Jath Wind Energy Private Room No.514 Limited 5Th Floor 8-2-684/A, Nsl Icon, Signature Towers 4Th Floor, Road No.12, Kondapur-500 084 Banjara Hills Hyderabad-500 034

For Appellant: Shri Aliasager RampurawalaFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(2)

…v. Core Health Care [2001] 251 ITR 61. 6. Feeling aggrieved, the Commissioner of Income Tax bas preferred the present appeal. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. We find that this Cou11 in the case of Dy. CIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. [2008] 298 ITR 1941/167 Taxman 206 has affirmed the view taken by the Gujarat High Court. 9. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing the expenditure of Rs.3,37,84,348/- towards the interest paid on the loans taken and expenditure on other items connected herewith for establishmen…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Cornerstone Property Investments Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1083/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. V. Sreenivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra. CIT DR
Section 14A

…ition of the asset till the date on which such asset was put to use shall not be allowed as deduction. The deduction is to be disallowed even if the interest is capitalized in the books of accounts or not. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Core Healthcare [298 ITR 1941 has held that provisions of section 36(1.)(iii) is a code in itself. In the present case, ITA No. 1082 & 1083/Bang/2019 Page 7 of 11 the interest paid by the assesse is not for the purpose of acquisition of any capital asset but for its inventory. We do not find any restriction in provisions contained u's 36(1)(iii) which provides that the int…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Cornerstone Property Investments Private Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1082/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Aug 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri. V. Sreenivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra. CIT DR
Section 14A

…ition of the asset till the date on which such asset was put to use shall not be allowed as deduction. The deduction is to be disallowed even if the interest is capitalized in the books of accounts or not. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Core Healthcare [298 ITR 1941 has held that provisions of section 36(1.)(iii) is a code in itself. In the present case, ITA No. 1082 & 1083/Bang/2019 Page 7 of 11 the interest paid by the assesse is not for the purpose of acquisition of any capital asset but for its inventory. We do not find any restriction in provisions contained u's 36(1)(iii) which provides that the int…

Dy. CIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. (298 ITR 1941) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax