Padmavati Jaykrishna v. CIT

131 ITR 653High Court1981#13352 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 57(iii)Section 147Section 148Section 1961Section 1962Section 24Section 250Section 36(1)(iii)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 57personbusinessinterest

Judgments citing Padmavati Jaykrishna v. CIT

Stella D Souza, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 31(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5719/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2013-14 Ms. Stella D Souza, Ito 31(2)(1), B/102 Diptigreen, Kautilya Bhavan Opp Bombay Cambridg School Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Chakala, Andheri (E), Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 099 Mumbai - 400099 Pan: Acjpd4624Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri S.C. Agarwal, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Praveen K. Srivastav, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 17.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 28.03.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Addl/Jcit(A) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2013-14. 2. In This Case, The Assessee Being An Individual & Director In M/S. Silver Global Services Pvt. Ltd. Had Earned Interest Income Of Rs.6,48,842/- From Fixed Deposits With Model Co-Operative Bank Ltd. & In Order To Avoid Premature Encashment Of Fd Had Taken Loan Against Such Fd From Model Co-Operative Bank Ltd. & Paid Interest To The Said Bank To The Tune Of Rs.8,39,626/- & Since The Interest Paid Was More Than The Interest Received, Therefore, Has Not Shown Such Interest Earned.

For Appellant: Shri S.C. Agarwal, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Praveen K. Srivastav, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 250

…sions of the Assessee in the impugned order, specifically the judgment of the Tribunal, however, by quoting “the provision of section 57(iii) of the Act and relying on the judgments of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Padmavathi Jaikrishna (1981) 131 ITR 653 and in the case of Sarabhai Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1993) 113 taxman 407 201 ITR 462, wherein it was respectively held that in order to decide whether an expenditure is a permissible deduction u/s 57(iii) of the Act, the 4 Ms. Stella D Souza nature of expenditure must be examined and if the dominate purpose for which expenditure was incurred not t…

Nitin Madanlal Khandelwal, Akola vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - Akola, Akola

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 55/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Shubham JainFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 57

…r personal expenditure and it should have been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning the income which is chargeable under the head "income from other sources. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Padmavati Jaykrishna vs. CIT (1981) 131 ITR 653 has held that in order to decide whether an expenditure is a permissible deduction under section 57(iii), the nature of the expenditure must be examined. Also the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Sons (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 113 Taxation 407, 201 ITR 464 has held that if the dominate purpose for which the expenditure was incurred not to…

Raj Kumar Kandoi, Jaipur vs. ACIT Central Circle 3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 575/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 57

…519 (SC) : CIT vs. Murli Manohar (1998) IX SITC 673 (All) : CIT vs. Rampur Timber & Turney Co. Ltd. (1981) 129 ITR 58 (All.) : CIT vs. Administrator General of Madras (1998) 142 Taxation 85 (Mad.). The Gujarat High Court in Padmavati Jaykrishna vs. CIT (1981) 131 ITR 653 has held that in order to decide whether an expenditure is a permissible deduction under section 57(iii), the nature of the expenditure must be examined. Also the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Sons (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1993) 113 Taxation 407, 201 ITR 464 has held that if the dominate purpose for which the expenditure was incurred not to…

Sh. Ravinandan Kumar, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes (R

ITA 21/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Jun 2021AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 57

…r (1998) IX SITC 673 (All) : CIT vs. Rampur Timber & Turney Co. Ltd. (1981) 129 ITR 58 (All.) : CIT vs. Administrator General of Madras (1998) 142 Taxation 85 (Mad.)). A.Y. 2014-15 Page 10 of 13 The Gujarat High Court in Padmavati Jaykrishna vs. CIT (1981) 131 ITR 653 has held that in order to decide whether an expenditure is a permissible deduction under section 57(iii), the nature of the expenditure must be examined. Also the Gujarat High Court in the case of Sarabhai Sons (P) Ltd. vs. CIT(1993) 113 Taxation 407, 201 ITR 464 has held that if the dominate purpose for which the expenditure was incurred not to…

Sh. Vinay Singal, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 23/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan, CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 57

…of December, 2006. In views of this, the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Abhishek Industries relied upon by the Id. 'AR1 is not applicable to facts of the case. Sirnilary, the decision in the case of Padmmavati Jaykrishna V. C1T, 131 ITR 653 (Guj) does not support the case of the revenue having regard to the facts of the case. 4.2 The findings of the Id. CIT(A) are given hereunder: "1 have carefully considered the contention of the Ld. counsel for the appellant and perused the relevant record. The assessee has given Rs. 4,25,86,3257- to different parties on interest. Similarly the as…

Sh. Rajeev Singal, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 22/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan, CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 57

…of December, 2006. In views of this, the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Abhishek Industries relied upon by the Id. 'AR1 is not applicable to facts of the case. Sirnilary, the decision in the case of Padmmavati Jaykrishna V. C1T, 131 ITR 653 (Guj) does not support the case of the revenue having regard to the facts of the case. 4.2 The findings of the Id. CIT(A) are given hereunder: "1 have carefully considered the contention of the Ld. counsel for the appellant and perused the relevant record. The assessee has given Rs. 4,25,86,3257- to different parties on interest. Similarly the as…

Sh. Vinay Singal, Ludhiana vs. ACIT, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 262/CHANDI/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 Mar 2019AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Mohan, CIT DR
Section 250(6)Section 57

…of December, 2006. In views of this, the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Abhishek Industries relied upon by the Id. 'AR1 is not applicable to facts of the case. Sirnilary, the decision in the case of Padmmavati Jaykrishna V. C1T, 131 ITR 653 (Guj) does not support the case of the revenue having regard to the facts of the case. 4.2 The findings of the Id. CIT(A) are given hereunder: "1 have carefully considered the contention of the Ld. counsel for the appellant and perused the relevant record. The assessee has given Rs. 4,25,86,3257- to different parties on interest. Similarly the as…