ITO v. Vikram Sadanand Barindra Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Hoskote

INCLINE REALTY PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -4(1), MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

…ntly, there is no scope for allowing interest expenses under either of the above 2 deductions. 8.9. There are several judicial precedents which hold that interest expenditure cannot be allowed against a capital asset, few of which are cited below: 1. [2007] 18 SOT 130 (Mum ITAT), Income Tax Officer vs Vikram Sadanand Hoskote: "11.... it is held that the interest paid by the assessee for the period commencing from the date of acquisition of shares till the date of sale would not form part of the cost of acquisition". 2. [2015] 61 taxmann.com 297 (Mumbai - Trib), Natural Gas Company (P) Ltd vs Deputy Commissione…

DCIT 3(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NEVILLE TULI, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

…the cost of improvement and in the instant case, there is no improvement done in the property. 5.2 The AO further relied on the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal at Mumbai in the case of V. Mahesh, Income Tax Officer vs. Vikram Sadanand Hoskote (2007) 18 SOT 130 (Mum) wherein it was held “that it cannot be said that expenditure incurred after the asset brought into existence i.e. after the acquisition of the asset would form part of the actual cost and that therefore interest paid on the loan received on the mortgage of the property would not form part of the cost of acquisition”. 5.3 The AO also relied…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. BARINDRA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…aimed by the assessee cannot be considered as cost of acquisition. The ld. DR further submitted that the AO has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of ITO Vs. Vikram Sadanand Barindra Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Hoskote (2007) 18 SOT 130 (Mum) wherein it has been held that interest expenses on borrowed funds are not to be considered as part of cost of acquisition of shares while computing capital gain under section 48 of the Act for the reason that for only those costs which are incurred to bring the assets into existence and put them in working condition should only be considered…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI vs. BARINDRA OVERSEAS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the revenue for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…aimed by the assessee cannot be considered as cost of acquisition. The ld. DR further submitted that the AO has rightly placed reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of ITO Vs. Vikram Sadanand Barindra Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Hoskote (2007) 18 SOT 130 (Mum) wherein it has been held that interest expenses on borrowed funds are not to be considered as part of cost of acquisition of shares while computing capital gain under section 48 of the Act for the reason that for only those costs which are incurred to bring the assets into existence and put them in working condition should only be considered…

DOSCH PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-9(3)(1), MUMBAI

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

…on that the interest was paid by the assessee to the bank subsequent to the purchase of the units of mutual funds. The learned DR relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of V. Mahesh, ITO- 14 (2)(3) Vs. Shri Vikram Sadanand Hoskote, (2007) 18 SOT 130 (Mum) and also relied on the decision of Ms. Deepti Singh Arora Vs. ACIT, 19 (1), Mumbai (2014) 49 taxmann.com 567 (Mum-Trib.). P a g e | 5 DOSCH PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD. 8. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the assessee has obtained loan from IIFL and Kotak bank fo…