How many judgments cite Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT?

25 judgments on BharatTax cite Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT (231 ITR 842), spanning 2016 to 2022.

Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT

231 ITR 842Supreme Court of India1998#4758 most cited

What is Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee cannot claim amounts written off as bad debts if they were not previously treated as income. Section 36(1)(vii) read with Section 36(2) prohibits such claims.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT · section 36(1)(vii) · section 36(2) · advances written off · bad debts · income tax act

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT

Bahwan Cybertek Private Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 290/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.290/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 11.07.2017

Section 143(3)

…however not make it a revenue expenditure. Why, an abortive capital expenditure is also capital in nature and, thus, a capital expenditure (refer, inter alia, Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1967] 63 ITR 65 (SC); Hasimara Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 231 ITR 842 (SC)), even as accounting policy may dictate it being written off, and not incorrectly so. Both the revenue and capital expenditure, it may be appreciated, are incurred only for the purpose of business, with a view to generate revenue. How successful it would actually be is a matter subsequent, and which in fact is not relevant. As explained by t…

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S Mcnally Bharati Engineering Co.Ltd., Kolkata

In the result the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 532/KOL/2012[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] I.T.A No.100/Kol/2011 Assessment Year : 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Vijayendra Kumar, JCIT

Section 115JSection 43B

…estion was a capital loss and cannot be allowed as deduction as the advances in question was given for acquiring the capital asset. The AO in this regard made a reference to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hashimara Industries Limited 230 ITR 927 (SC) wherein it was held that the deposit made by the assessee in connection with a leave and license agreement to work in a mill and loss due to irrecoverability of such deposit was to be regarded as a capital loss and not a business loss. 24. Before CIT(A) the assessee submitted that deduction u/s 28 or 37(1) of the Act is admissible for loss…

National Housing Bank, New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result ground No. 8 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 3704/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinational Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Lodhi Road, New Delhi Vs. New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Page 2 Of 50 National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) National Housing Bank, Addl Cit, Core-5A, India Habitat Centre, Range-31(1), Vs. Lodhi Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ravi Jain, CIT DR

Section 271Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…Rs. 1,50,45,32,696/- was a Capital Loss in nature. It is settled law that Loss being capital in nature cannot be allowed as a Business Loss. This principle has been duly affirmed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 230 ITR 927 (SC) and m the case of CIT, Uttar Pradesh vs. Nainital Bank Limited (1965) 55 ITR 707 (SC). The assessee has itself accepted vide its letter dated 16/3/2005 that "the bank has issued certain cheques to State Bank of India during 1991-1992 for purchase of securities." The assessee has further made a general statement vide its letter dated 18/3/200…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Hansa Vision India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 943/CHNY/2013[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.943/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2001-02 M/S Hansa Vision India Pvt. Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of (Formerly Tiruvengadam Investments Income Tax, V. Pvt. Ltd.), 605-606, Anna Salai, Company Circle Iii(2), South Indian Film Chamber Building, 2Nd Floor, Thousand Lights, Chennai - 600 034. Chennai - 600 006. Pan : Aabct 3770 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate

…essee incurred the expenditure for the purpose of establishing a capital asset. Hence the loss suffered by the assessee cannot be allowed as revenue loss. The Ld. D.R. placed his reliance on the judgement of Apex Court in Hasimara Industries Limited v. CIT (230 ITR 927). 5. On the contrary, Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that admittedly, the assessee is engaged in the business of dealing in shares and development of property. In the course of business activity, the assessee attempted to acquire a property at Greams Road, Chennai. In fact, according to the Ld. 4 I.T.A. No.943/Mds/…

Kolon Investment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 8, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2870/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2870/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Kolon Investment Pvt. Ltd. Cit-8, बनाम/ 417-419, 4Th Floor, Room No. 259, Aayakar Bhavan, M. V. Road, Andheri (E), M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Mumbai-400 059 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaack 9118 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Girish Dave & Ms. Kadambari Dave ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri H. N. Singh सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 16.5.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 23.8.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: The Instant Appeal By The Assessee Agitates The Revision U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 31.3.2014 By The Commissioner Of Income Tax-8, Mumbai (‘Cit’ For Short) Qua Its Assessment U/S. 143(3) Dated 01.12.2011 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10. 2. The Basis Of The Revision In The Present Case Is The Acceptance By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Of The Assessee’S Claim For Short Term Capital Gain (Stcg) On The Non- Exercise Of The Option To Subscribe To The (Equity) Share Capital In Sintex Industries

For Appellant: Shri Girish Dave &For Respondent: Shri H. N. Singh

Section 143(3)Section 2(47)Section 263

…signable), toward subscription of a share, as contended by the ld. CIT. The only difference in that case would be that being non-transferable, loss on its forfeiture would be a loss of capital, or a capital loss (refer: Hasimara Industries Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 230 ITR 927 (SC)). 3.3 Our first reason for holding the loss to be not a STCL, is that there has been no extinguishment of the right (or option) as on 31.3.2009. The right to acquire the shares (capital asset), a capital asset itself, would lapse by time or expire only on 17.7.2009 4 Kolon Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (day-end), and not earlier. The loss b…