Eveready Industries India Limited v. CIT

323 ITR 312High Court2010#5607 most cited

What is Eveready Industries India Limited v. CIT authority for?

Interest income derived from funds temporarily not required for immediate business activity is assessable as business income, not income from other sources.

21

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Eveready Industries India Limited v. CIT · business income · interest income · income from other sources · profit and gain from business · short term fixed deposits

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(ii)project completion methodpercentage completion methodsection 57(iii)disallowance of interest expenditureput to usesection 36(1)(iii)section 57section 36(1)section 36capital expenditureincome from other sources

Judgments citing Eveready Industries India Limited v. CIT

DCIT Circle 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Nandanbala Commercials Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection filed by the assesse is also dismissed

ITA 1134/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhdy. Commissioner Of Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Income Tax Circle 13(2)(2) Private Limited Room No. 452, 4 Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sanjay Infraspace Limited) Aayakar Bhavan, 1401-A, Wing One Bkc, M.K. Road, Plot No. C-66, G-Block, Mumbai – 400020 Bkc, Bandra-East Mumbai -400 092 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aavcs1575L Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: HM Bhatt
Section 143(2)Section 36(1)(ii)

…fit and Gain from Business" and not as STCG. P a g e | 11 ITA No.1134/Mum/2023 CO 67/Mum/2023 DCIT 13(2)(2) Vs. Nandanbala Commercials Pvt. Ltd. h) Reliance is placed on the judgement of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of CIT v. Production P. Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 598/211 CTR 393, wherein it was held that what is business income and what is not business income has to be judged from the main activity of the business of each assessee. In the present case, main activity of the assessee was export business and not that of earning interest on short term fixed deposits. The assessee instead of keeping such funds idl…

Kadavanthara Builders Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward -4(2), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2485/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 May 2023AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)

…2485/CHNY/2019 Page 16 of 26 Interest income should constitute business income CIT v Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd [2018] 403 ITR 453 (Kar) (FB) Swire Holdings (P.) Ltd. v ITO [2006] 6 SOT 621 (Bang- Trib.) (SMC) Eveready Industries India Ltd v. CIT 12010] 323 ITR 312 (Calcutta) CIT v. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 389 (Bombay) CIT v Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd [2006] 281 ITR 346 (Del.) Interest income would he a capital receipt CIT v Bokaro Stcel Limited [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) CIT v Karnataka Power Corporation [2001] 247 ITR 268 (SC) PCIT v Bank Note Paper Mill India (P.) Ltd [2019] 412 ITR 4…

Kadavanthara Builders Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, Ward -4(2), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2484/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 May 2023AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)

…2485/CHNY/2019 Page 16 of 26 Interest income should constitute business income CIT v Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd [2018] 403 ITR 453 (Kar) (FB) Swire Holdings (P.) Ltd. v ITO [2006] 6 SOT 621 (Bang- Trib.) (SMC) Eveready Industries India Ltd v. CIT 12010] 323 ITR 312 (Calcutta) CIT v. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 389 (Bombay) CIT v Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd [2006] 281 ITR 346 (Del.) Interest income would he a capital receipt CIT v Bokaro Stcel Limited [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) CIT v Karnataka Power Corporation [2001] 247 ITR 268 (SC) PCIT v Bank Note Paper Mill India (P.) Ltd [2019] 412 ITR 4…

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd .(Successor to M/S Sahajanad Hi-Tech Construction Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1893/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1885/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successor to Bellissimo Developers Thane Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3) (Formerly Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(2)), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1864/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

M/S. Darjeeling Organic Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the order of the Ld

ITA 748/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Ms. Madhumita Roy, Hon’Ble] [Through Virtual Court] I.T.A. No. 748/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Darjeeling Organic Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd...............................………………...........Appellant 7Th Floor, Jain Centre, 34A, Metcalfe Street, Kolkata – 700 013. [Pan: Aadcd 1923 B] Vs. Dcit, Cir – 4(1), Kolkata ……………………………...........................................................Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: Shri S.M. Surana, Advocate Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 17, 2020 Date Of Pronouncing The Order November 20, 2020 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata - 2, Kolkata Dated 19.03.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’).

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)

…ecision in the case of CIT vs Tasah Tea Ltd. (supra).” 6. On the issue of taxability of interest income, we held as follows: “5.1. I am of the considered view that the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in Eveready Industries India Ltd. vs CIT (2010) 323 ITR 312 (Cal) and Warren Tea Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 374 ITR 06 (Cal) are squarely applicable to the facts of the case. It is also seen that the operation of the said decisions has not been stayed by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the decisions 4 I.T.A. No. 748/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2…

Jay Shree Tea & Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata

Appeal is allowed

ITA 1016/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Sainiassessment Year :2013-14

Section 143(3)Section 263

…. It is also seen that the operation of the said decisions has not been stayed by the Supreme Court. Therefore the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of the decisions in the case of Eveready Industries India Learned. Vs. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 312 (cal) and Warren Tea Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 06 (Cal). 5. Subject to the observations made above, the assessment order passed by the AO is set aside in respect of only the point stated in Para-2 above. The Assessing Officer is directed to initiate fresh assessment proceedings & carry out necessary verification & take action accordingly after…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Victory Portfolio Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 4500/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishivictory Portfolio Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur Circle-17(1), Commercial Complex, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Victory Portfolio Ltd, Circle-17(1), 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur New Delhi Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 14ASection 225Section 36Section 40Section 80Section 88E

…NR 8 90692/– as ineligible sum for rebate. The learned CIT – A deleted the above addition and directed the learned assessing officer to grant rebate giving a finding and relying upon the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs Producin private limited 290 ITR 598. Therefore, assessee officer is in appeal before us. 21. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer and stated that when the interest income is earned on fixed deposit with the stock exchange it is chargeable to tax as income from other sources and cannot be a business income. 22. The l…

M/S. Victory Portfolio Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 4267/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishivictory Portfolio Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur Circle-17(1), Commercial Complex, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Victory Portfolio Ltd, Circle-17(1), 209, Gupta Towers, Azardpur New Delhi Commercial Complex, New Delhi Pan: Aaafv9634K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Smt Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 14ASection 225Section 36Section 40Section 80Section 88E

…NR 8 90692/– as ineligible sum for rebate. The learned CIT – A deleted the above addition and directed the learned assessing officer to grant rebate giving a finding and relying upon the judgment of Kerala High Court in case of CIT vs Producin private limited 290 ITR 598. Therefore, assessee officer is in appeal before us. 21. The learned departmental representative vehemently supported the order of the learned assessing officer and stated that when the interest income is earned on fixed deposit with the stock exchange it is chargeable to tax as income from other sources and cannot be a business income. 22. The l…

ACIT, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Darjeeling Organic Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 125/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Mar 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri S. M Surana, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…gned interest income is directly linked with the agricultural operation of assessee. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Eveready Industries India Ltd. v. CIT & Anr. reported (2010) 323 ITR 312 (Cal) wherein the Hon'ble court has held:- 39. As we have already narrated above that the assessee in this case procured loans from banks and other financial institutions for its tea growing and manufacturing business and part of such funds remain temporarily unutilized. The assessee, instead of keeping the amount idle, invested the surplus fund…

Tech Process Solutions Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 5395/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…be assessable as business income by the CIT(A). The judgement of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the caseo f CIT vs. East India Hotels 207 ITR 881 (Kolkata) (HC) and the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Production (P) Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 598 (Kar) also supports the aforesaid proposition. 13. In view of the aforesaid discussion an having regard to the material on record, we hereby affirm the action of the CIT(A) in accepting the interest income of ₹ 68,26,326/- as business income. Thus, this aspect also, Revenue fails." 18. Respectfully, following the Tribunal order in assessee’s ow…

ACIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Technoprocess Solutions Ltd ( Formerly Bill Junction Payment Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 8576/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…be assessable as business income by the CIT(A). The judgement of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the caseo f CIT vs. East India Hotels 207 ITR 881 (Kolkata) (HC) and the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Production (P) Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 598 (Kar) also supports the aforesaid proposition. 13. In view of the aforesaid discussion an having regard to the material on record, we hereby affirm the action of the CIT(A) in accepting the interest income of ₹ 68,26,326/- as business income. Thus, this aspect also, Revenue fails." 18. Respectfully, following the Tribunal order in assessee’s ow…

Technprocess Solutions Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA

ITA 8547/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Ms Krupa Gandhi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…be assessable as business income by the CIT(A). The judgement of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the caseo f CIT vs. East India Hotels 207 ITR 881 (Kolkata) (HC) and the judgement of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Production (P) Ltd (2007) 290 ITR 598 (Kar) also supports the aforesaid proposition. 13. In view of the aforesaid discussion an having regard to the material on record, we hereby affirm the action of the CIT(A) in accepting the interest income of ₹ 68,26,326/- as business income. Thus, this aspect also, Revenue fails." 18. Respectfully, following the Tribunal order in assessee’s ow…

The ACIT, Circle - 2(1), Vijayawada vs. M/S Agri Gold Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vijayawada

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 505/VIZ/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jan 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri Debakumar SonowalFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR

…. Agri Gold Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Vijayawada adjudicating the issue relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. LOK holdings and Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Eveready Industries Limited Vs. CIT and Anr (2010) 323 ITR 312. For ready reference, we extract the relevant paragraph of the Hon’ble ITAT order, which reads as under: “6.6 Be that as it may, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of LOK Holdings, has held as follows:- “Interest earned by assessee a property developer, by making temporary deposits of surplus money out of advances received by it from inte…

ITO 2(1)(4), Mumbai vs. Canara Bank Securities Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 821/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(1)(4), M/S Canara Bank Securities Room No.553, 5Th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 7Th Floor, Maker Chamber-Iii, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No. Aaacg2218H

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263oSection 56

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,‘ सी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘C’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2008-09 Income Tax Officer-2(1)(4), M/s Canara Bank Securities Room No.553, 5th Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, 7th Floor, Maker Chamber-III, Vs. M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) PAN. No. AAACG2218H राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri H.N.Singh CIT-DR "नधा"रती क" ओर…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram Properties Pvt Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 2018/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: 03.04.2017
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 250(6)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…er the head “Business” is not correct. As regards the Bank Interest, the same is assessable under the head “Business” as in the light of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Eveready Industries India Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (323 ITR 312).” 6.2 After hearing both sides, we don’t find merit in the Order of the Ld.CIT(A). The assessee has parked its surplus funds in other companies and earned interest. Such income has to be necessarily assessed under the head ‘Income from other source’ as per Section 54 of the Act, as held by the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO’s decision is in accordance with t…

Rohda Specialtiy Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

ITA 830/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish V ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajguru M
Section 143(3)

…its that income from fixed deposits in Banks, MIDC & MSEB should be assessed under the head income from business and not under the head income from other sources. 1. CIT Vs. Paramount Premises Ltd. [190 ITR 259] (Bom) 2. Eveready Industries India Ltd. Vs CIT [323 ITR 312] (Cal) 3. CIT Vs. Jagdishprasad M. Joshi [318 ITR 420] (Bom) 12. The Ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Swani Spice Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and submits that interest on fixed deposits can never be income from business as the Assessee is not into money le…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed for want of substantial question of law

ITA 622/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri C.N. Prasadita No. 830/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Vs. Addl. Cit – Circle 6(1) India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Room No.511, Aayakar Bhawan M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals Mk Road India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing New Marine Lines 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 Pan : Aaaca3841L Ita No. 622/Mum/2014 : (A.Y : 2009-10) Dcit -7(2) Vs. M/S Rhodia Specialty Chemicals Room No.624, Mk Road India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Mumbai – 400 020 M/S Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd.), Phoenix House, A Wing 4Th Floor, 462 Senapati Bapat Marg Lower Parel (West) Mumbai – 400 013 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manish V ShahFor Respondent: Shri Rajguru M
Section 143(3)

…its that income from fixed deposits in Banks, MIDC & MSEB should be assessed under the head income from business and not under the head income from other sources. 1. CIT Vs. Paramount Premises Ltd. [190 ITR 259] (Bom) 2. Eveready Industries India Ltd. Vs CIT [323 ITR 312] (Cal) 3. CIT Vs. Jagdishprasad M. Joshi [318 ITR 420] (Bom) 12. The Ld. DR strongly placed reliance on the orders of the authorities below and the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Swani Spice Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and submits that interest on fixed deposits can never be income from business as the Assessee is not into money le…

Pinebridge Investments Capital India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-6(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4355/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4355/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Pinebridge Investments Asstt. Commissioner Of बनाम/ Capital India Private Income Tax Circle 6(1), V. Limited, Room No. 506, 5 Th Floor, 1101, Tower “B”, Aayakar Bhavan, Peninsula Business Park, M.K. Road, G.K. Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 013. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aafca7262A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 143(3)Section 250

…investments. The assessee relied on the following decisions:- 1. Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT v. Vashulinga Finance P. Ltd. (ITA No. 5464/Del/2011). 2. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Eveready Industries India Ltd.(2009) 323 ITR 312. 3. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Tirupati Woolen Mills Ltd. [1992], 193 ITR 252 4. The Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Tamil Nadu Dairy Development Corporation Ltd. [1995] 216 ITR 535 5. Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Nagpur Engineering Co Ltd. 245 ITR 806 6. Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Paramount…