Kerala in CIT v. Dr. V.P Gopinathan

229 ITR 801High Court1998#23902 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 11 Section 12 Section 143(3)Section 246A Section 250 Section 253 Section 57(iii)

Judgments citing Kerala in CIT v. Dr. V.P Gopinathan

INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION OF CHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, CHANDIGARH , CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 760/CHANDI/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vineet Krishan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253

…none, and, therefore, the amount paid by the assessee as interest on the loan that he took from the bank did not reduce his income by way of interest on the fixed deposit placed by him in the bank. CIT vs. Dr. V.P. Gopinathan (1997) 137 CTR (Ker) 190: (1998) 229 ITR 801 (Ker): TC S41.3613 set aside; Jashvidhyaben C. Mehta vs. CIT (1988) 67 CTR (Guj) 239 (1988) 172 ITR 680 (Guj): TC 41R.709 distinguished. (iii) The Supreme Court also in Bangalore Club Vs- 350 ITR 509 affirmed that interest on FDR is not covered by ambit of mutuality principle & will therefore be liable to tax. It was held “ It was observed that…

PLAZA PARTNERS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 52(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6728/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 6728/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Plaza Partners, Vs Acit, 301-303, Mercantile House, 15, Circle-52(1), K.G. Marg, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaffp2318B Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 04.02.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 02.03.2021

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Apoorva Bhardwaj, Sr. DR

Section 10(34)Section 250(6)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 57

…' has not been incurred in connection with making investment in deposit with ICICI bank or loan / advance given to Shri Dhiraj Sarna & Shri Shakti Singh and disallowed the expenditure. 11. The revenue relied on the case of CIT v. Gopinathan (Dr. V.P.) (1998) 229 ITR 801 (Ker), wherein it was held that the taxing authority is entitled and is bound to determine the true legal relation with reference to the transaction of making a deposit and borrowing on such deposit and in the process, the authority has to unravel the state of affairs to determine the true character of the relationship and the process has to be b…

SHRI. CHANDRAKANT R AGRAWAL,MUMBAI vs. PR CIT (A)-30, , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals are allowed

ITA 380/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodshri Chandrakant R. Agrawal Pr. Commissioner Of 61, Sadhna Daftary Road, Income-Tax (Central) -30, R. No. 541, 5Th Floor, Malad East, Vs. Mumbai – 400097 Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai Pan – Aabpa8047N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 57

…no more res integra and had been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Dr. V.P Gopinathan (2001) 248 ITR 449 (SC). We find that the Hon‟ble Apex Court while reversing the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in CIT Vs. Dr. V.P Gopinathan (1998) 229 ITR 801 (Ker), had held, that interest on loan taken by the assessee from the bank on security of fixed deposit could not be reduced from his income by way of interest on the fixed deposit placed by him in the bank. The issues which came up for consideration before the Hon‟ble Apex Court were as under: “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances…