How many judgments cite South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT?

30 judgments on BharatTax cite South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT (240 ITR 24), spanning 2007 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 56, Section 92CA.

South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

240 ITR 24High Court1999#4007 most cited

What is South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest earned on temporary deployment of surplus funds is assessable under the head 'Income from Other Sources'. Expenditure incurred to earn such income is allowable as a deduction.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2024.

Also referred to as

South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT · 240 ITR 24 · 163 CTR 617 · HC · 1999 · income from other sources · business income · interest receipts · deduction · surplus funds

Also reported as

163 CTR 617

Sections most often in play

Section 250 Section 56 Section 92CA

Issues it is cited on

income from other sources company india business interest

Judgments citing South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6(1)(1),MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ESSAR POWER GUJARAT LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 137/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2014-15 Mr. Arun Bende M/S. Essar Power Asst. Commissioner Of Gujarat Ltd. 11Th Floor, Essar House, Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Mumbai. 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Room No.504, 5Th Floor, Mahalaxmi, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 400034. M.K.Road, Pan:Aabce7510K Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. Revenue By : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit), D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21 . 05 . 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29 . 05 . 2024 O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay: 1. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit Appeal Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (“Act” In Short) Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1058193153(1) Dated 23.11.2023 For Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Following Grounds Of Appeal Have Been Raised:

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), D.R

Section 250Section 801ASection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mr. Arun Bende M/s. Essar Power Asst. Commissioner of Gujarat Ltd. 11th Floor, Essar House, Income Tax, Circle-6(1)(1), Mumbai. 11 K.K. Marg, Vs. Room No.504, 5th Floor, Mahalaxmi, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 400034. M.K.Road, PAN:AABCE7510K Mumbai- 400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta, A.R. Revenue by : Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT), D.R. Date of Hearing : 21 . 05 . 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 29 .…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. B.V.REDDY ENTERPRISES PVT LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1914/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1914/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. B.V. Reddy Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, New No. 21/Old No. 10A, First Floor, Corporate Circle 1(2), Umayal Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 010. [Pan:Aaccn2252L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04.11.2022 : आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, Dated 29.03.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. Facts Are, In Brief, That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2010-11 On 13.10.2010 Admitting Total Income Of ₹.15,50,25,060/-. The Assessing Officer Has Completed The Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated

For Appellant: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate

Section 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

….1.3 It is a settled principle that when surplus funds are invested in bank, interest thereon is to be assessed under the head "Income from Other Sources". This view was held in a host of binding decisions such as South India Shipping Corporation Vs CIT (Mad) 240 ITR 24, CIT Vs Monarch Tools (P.) Ltd. (Mad) 260 ITR 258, The Totgars Co-operative Sales Society Ltd. Vs ITO (SC) 322 ITR 283 etc. Hence such interest receipts amounting to Rs. 20,17,90,108 has to be assessed under the head" Income from Other Sources". 3.1.4 After having decided to assess such receipts under the head "Income from Other Sources", only exp…

ACIT- 14 (1) (2), MUMBAI vs. URJANKUR SHREE TATYASAHEB KORE WARNA POWER CO, LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, ground nos

ITA 1420/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. S.N. Kabra, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None

Section 14Section 56(1)

…57. (vi) Traco Cable Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (Ker) 72 ITR 603 (vii) Madhya Pradesh Stale Industries Corpn. Ltd. Vs. CIT (MP) 69 ITR 824 (MP) (viii) CIT vs. Assam Plantation Crops Dev. Corpn Ltd. (Gau) 221 ITR 392 (ix) South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. DY.CIT-240 ITR 24 (Mad) (x) CIT vs. Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. – 280 ITR 617 (AH.) (xi) Shree Krishna Polyesters Ltd. vs. DY. CIT-274 ITR 21 (Bom.) 8. We have pursued the order of ld. AO, ld. CIT (A) and the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee has taken loan for the development, construction and operation of a power generation project and had entere…

OPTICAL DISC MARKETING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMTED (NOW MERGED WITH DISHA INFIN CONSULTANS PRIVATE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-13(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 2202/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () M/S Optical Disc Marketing The Dcit, Circle 13(1)(1) (India) P. Ltd. Vs. 2Nd Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (Now Merged With Disha Infin Consultants Pvt. Ltd.) Mumbai - 702, 7Th Floor, Samudra Setu, Near Parsi Agiary, Opp. Annand Bhavan, Opp. B.D. Desai Road, Mumbai – 400 026 Pan No. Aaaco3254B (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri H.D. Shah, A.R Revenue By : Ms. Shrikala Pardeshi, D.R Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri H.D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shrikala Pardeshi, D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…ting (India) P,. Ltd. Vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle 13(1)(1), Mumbai 6 ITA No. 2202/Mum/2018 – A.Y 2013-14 6537/Mum/2017, dated 16.09.2019. Insofar the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Madras in the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 163 CTR 617 (Mad) is concerned, we find that as the issue before the Hon‟ble High Court was in respect of assessing of the interest income on bank deposits, which is not the issue in the case before us, therefore, the same is distinguishable on facts. Also, the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. Gimpex Pvt. Ltd. (2004) 268 IT…

HAZARIBAG RANCHI EXPRESSWAY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 14(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 6696/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negihazaribagh Ranchi Vs. Ito-14(2)(1) 4Th Floor, Expressway Ltd. The Il&Fs Financial Center Aaykar Bhawan Plot No.C-22, G Block M.K.Road Bkc, Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aacch2490J Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 234BSection 56(1)

…21 ItR 392 Share capital received deposited in bank – Interest eanred is to be assessed under –“ Other sources” • The identical ruling has been given in the following cases. 7 Hazaribagh Ranchi Expressway Ltd. i. South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT-240 ITR 24 (Mad.) ii. CIT vs. Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. -280 ITR 617 (All.) iii. Shree Krishna Ploysters Ltd. Vs. Dy.CIT -274 ITR 21(Bom.) 5.16 In the back drop of the discussion in foregoing paras, the only and only natural and judicial inference that crops up is that the interest earned by the assesee of Rs. 75,96,711/- is taxable under the head ‘Inc…

FIVE STARS BULKCARRIERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 15(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 590/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Oct 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Vodal Raj Singh

Section 115VSection 143(3)Section 92B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण] पुणे "यायपीठ “बी” पुणे म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.590/MUM/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment year : 2010-11 B.G. Shirke Construction Technology ………. अपीलाथ" / Pvt. Ltd., (Being the amalgamated Appellant. Company in which the erstwhile Five Stars Bulkcarries Pvt. Ltd., has Merged into w.e.f. 01.04.2015) Unit No.3, Brady Gladys Plaza, Senapati Bapat Road, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013. बनाम v/s The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, ………. ""यथ" / Circle – 5(1), Mumbai. Respondent Assesse…

PUNE SHOLAPUR ROAD DEV. CO. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. I.T.O. - 10(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 6674/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ram Lal Negipune Sholapur Road Dev.Co.Ltd. Vs. Ito-10(1)(3) Room No.461, 4Th Floor The Il &Fs Financial Center Plot No.C-22, G Block Aaykar Bhawan, M.K.Road Bandra Kurla Complex , Mumbai-400 020 Bandra(E) Mumbai-400 051 Pan/Gir No.Aafcp1669Q Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 234B

…posit. Therefore, the interest earned on fixed deposit should be charged as income from other sources and should not be capitalised nor set off against the interest paid on borrowed fund. 5.1 In the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (1999) 240 ITR 24 (Madras), the Hon’ble Madras High Court has held that when the assessee was carrying on business, the interest earned by it from loans and bank deposits was assessable under the head ‘Income From Other Sources.” The High Court had followed the Hon’ble Apex Court’s judgement in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd. Vs CIT 227 IT…

G.K. FOUNDERS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 14(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7464/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negiassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary Arunkumar Singh, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 80Section 80I

…same is not emanating from business activity of the assessee by relying on the decision in the case of Murli Investment Co. vs. CIT 167 ITR 368 (Raj), Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 191 ITR 359 (Bom) and South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 24 (Madras). The AO further relied on the case of Kinfra Export Promotion Industrial Ports Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 59 SOT 57 (URO Kochin) wherein it has been held that if interest income is not derived from eligible undertaking it is not eligible for deduction. According to the AO, there is no direct nexus between the interest income with the business a…

HOUSING DEVELOPMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 5986/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Dr. K. ShivaramFor Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 80

…require to be classified under the different heads as set out in section 14. The mode and manner in which the income is derived Is relevant In determining under which head the income received by the assessee would fall [south India Shipping corporation v. CIT 240 ITR 24 (Mad)], It has to be seen whether the assessee was carrying on the business of money lending in a regular, systematic anti organized manner. In other Words, what is required to be considered is whether the loans are advanced with The Intention to carry on the business of money-lending. The intention has to be gathered with reference to all the act…

DCIT CEN CIR 1(2), MUMBAI vs. SEARS CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6975/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Dcit, M/S. Sears Construction Central Circle-1(2), बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Room No.906, Pratishtha 514, Dalamal Towers, Vs. Bhavan, 10Th Floor, Old 211, Nariman Point, Cgo Building Annexe, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacs5289E

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, जे, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एन. के. "धान, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri N.K. Pradhan, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, M/s. Sears Construction Central Circle-1(2), बनाम/ Pvt. Ltd. Room No.906, Pratishtha 514, Dalamal Towers, Vs. Bhavan, 10th Floor, Old 211, Nariman Point, CGO Building Annexe, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAACS5289E राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri C.S. Gulati CIT-DR "नधा"रती…

EXPRESS INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 930/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.930/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. Express Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Express Estates, No. 2, Club House Vs. Income Tax, Road, Mount Road, Chennai 600 002. Company Circle Ii(1), [Pan: Aabce5521G] Chennai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.06.2018 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 9, Chennai Dated 30.12.2016 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2009-10. The Only Effective Ground Raised In The Appeal Of The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Holding That The Interest Receipt Of ₹.62,77,671/- Is Income & Is To Be Assessed As Income From Other Sources.

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani, JCIT

Section 143(3)

…ncidental income ought to be assessed only under the head ‘income from other sources’. This is also made clear by the Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals, 262 ITR 278, Madras High Court decision in the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd., 240 ITR 24 and the Supreme Court decisions in the cases of Sterling Foods 237 ITR 579, Liberty India, 317 ITR 218. 7.3.8 Though these judgements have been rendered in a different context, however the principle laid down is same. While defining the term ‘derived from’, the Hon’ble Courts have held that only that income which is: directly earned from the busin…

ASST CIT 6(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. ESSAR POWER GUJARAT LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 4020/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./4020/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./4019/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 वष" Acit-6(2)(2) M/S. Essar Power Gujarat Ltd. Room No.563, Aayakar Bhavan, Essar House, 11 Kk Marg, Mahalaxmi Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 034. Pan:Aabce 7510 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Virendra Singh अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kishnadwala सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 21/05/2018 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 01/06/2018 आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" अिधिनयम क" क" धारा क" धारा धारा 254(1)के अ"तग"त आदेश धारा के अ"तग"त आदेश के अ"तग"त आदेश के अ"तग"त आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य ,राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार - Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 23/03/2016 Of The Cit(A)-12,Mumbai,The Assessing Officer (Ao)Has Filed Above Appeals.Assessee-Company Is Engaged In The Business Setting Up Of Coal Based Power Plant.As The Issues Raised In Both The Appeals Are Similar,So,We Are Adjudicating Them Together.Details Of Filings Of Returns,Retunred Incomes,Assessed Incomes Can Be Summar -Ised As Under: Ay. Roi Filed On Returned Income Asst.Date Assessed Income 2011-12 05/09/2011 Rs.3.65 Crores 18/03/2014 Rs.6.99 Crores 2012-13 27/09/2012 Rs.5.44 Crores 29/12/2014 Rs.11.14 Crores

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KishnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Singh

Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “जेजेजेजे” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मेमेमेमे खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“J”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./4020/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./4019/Mum/2016,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 वष" ACIT-6(2)(2) M/s. Essar Power Gujarat Ltd. Room No.563, Aayakar Bhavan, Essar Hou…

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

…head ‘Income from other sources’ . The CIT relied upon the following decisions: (i) Krishna Polyester Ltd. v. DCIT, 274 ITR 21 (Bom.) (ii) Ferro Concrete Construction (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT, 290 ITR 713(MP) (iii)South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT, 240 ITR 24 (Mad.) (iv) CIT v. Monarch Tools Pvt. Ltd. , 260 ITR 258(Mad.) The CIT held that in view of these above stated decisions, the issue is not free from doubt that the income earned by the assessee company from fixed deposits kept with the banks could be assessed under the head ‘Income from other sources’ and perusal of assessment records reveals that…

M/S. CHENNAI PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, both the assessee’s and the Revenue’s appeals are partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1858/CHNY/2011[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1858/Mds/2011 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004-05 Chennai Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Asst. Commissioner Of Income Refinery House, Manali, Vs. Tax, Chennai – 600 068 Company Circle-I(3), [Pan: Aaacm 4392C] Chennai – 600 034 (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: AdvocateFor Respondent: 07.09.2017

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(iii)

…ld arise only where the same is assessable as business income, while the Revenue insists that the same is assessable u/s. 56, i.e., as income from other sources. Toward the same it relies on the decisions in South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 240 ITR 24 (Mad) and Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172 (SC). The assessee, on the other hand, has relied on, inter alia, the decisions in CIT v. Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315 (SC) and CIT v. Karnal Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. [2000] 243 ITR 2 (SC). The question therefore is which of the two sets of decisions is…

M/S. REPCO HOME FINANCE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 2733/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari]

For Appellant: Mr.M.Viswanathan, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundaresan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

…ed on deposit of `63,52,015/-. Aggrieved by the order of ld. Assessing Officer, the assessee carried the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). On appeal, Ld.CIT(A) following the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of South India Shipping Corpn. Ltd. in 240 ITR 24 (Mad.), endorsed the view of the ld. Assessing Officer. Against the order of Ld.CIT(A), now the Assessee is in appeal before us. 12. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. The main plea of assessee is that the assessee availed loan for the purpose of advancing the same for home finance and during the time gap between…

M/S. REPCO HOME FINANCE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 2732/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari]

For Appellant: Mr.M.Viswanathan, C.A ""For Respondent: Dr.S.Sundaresan

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 36

DAMOS TRADING COMPANY P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 6(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1205/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Arun Shenoy, DR

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 57

…re allowed u/s 57 of the Act.” 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) relied of the judgment of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 163 CTR 617 and held that the interest income is liable to be assessed under the head “income from other sources”. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of expenses of Rs.15,56,592/- made by the AO as it was not attributable to earning interest income from fixed deposits etc. 5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel of the assessee filed in paper book containing a co…

REWAS PORTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 7(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 758/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Dr.P.Danial

Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 56(1)Section 57

…als and fertilisers Ltd versus C.LT (SC) to 27 ITR 172, C.I.T versus Petroff is co- operative (Guj) 241 ITR 139, CIT versus Cochin Shipyard Ltd (Ker) 158 CTR 208, C.I.T V/s Rassii cement Ltd (AP) 232 ITR 554, South India shipping Corporation versus ACIT (Mad) 240 ITR 24, C.LT V/s Kisan Sahakari Genie bills (All) 280 ITR 617, Chanderpaul sugar: company Ltd versus C.LT (All) 280 ITR 612, Bokaro steel Ltd versus CIT (patna) 170 ITR 545, CIT versus Coromandel Siemens Ltd (SC) 234 ITR 412, C.LT versus auto cast Ltd (SC) 248 ITR 110, Consolidated fibers and chemicals Ltd versus CIT (Cal) 273 ITR 353, Skayef Ltd versus…

KAVITA MARKETING P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 6(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Asst

ITA 6022/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia (Jm) & Shri Ramit Kochar (Am) Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash JhunjhunwalaFor Respondent: Shri. Rajesh Kumar Yadav

Section 143(3)

…oney lending business. Therefore, as per the tax auditor report, no money lending business was carried out by the assessee and, therefore, as per the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (2000) 163 CTR 617, submitted that the fact that a person carries on business does not lead to the inference that all income received by such a person is business income. The manner in which the income is arrived has to be considered, therefore, the matter may be decided on merits accordingly. 4 Assessment Year: 2008-09 7. We have heard the rival contentions of…

COASTAL GUJARAT POWER LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 6(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2298/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. No 2298/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11) Coastal Gujarat Power Limited, The Income Tax Officer 34, Sant Tukaram Road, 6(2)(1), फनाभ/ Carnac Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400009 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 अऩीराथी की ओय से / Applicant By : Shri Farrokh V Irani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri M C Omi Ningshen सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 14.12.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of : 15.3.2017 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee & Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), Mumbai, Dated25.2.2015 For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The First Ground Raised By The Assessee Is Against Upholding The Order Of Assessing Officer As Regards Interest Income From Securities Deposited With Paschim Gujarat Vij Co.Ltd (Hereinafter Referred To As Pgvcl) For Availing Electricity For The Purposes Of Construction Of Power

For Respondent: Shri M C Omi Ningshen

Section 143(3)

…gs and treated the said interest of Rs.88,72,800/- from PGVCL as the income under the head “Income from other sources” and taxed accordingly by framing the assessment u/s 143(3) by relying on the following decisions: i) South India Shipping Corp. Ltd V/s CIT -240 ITR 24(Mad); ii) CIT V/s Delhi Brass and Metal Works Ltd 313 ITR 352; iii) CIT V/s Dr.V.P.Gopinathan iv) Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd V/s CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC); v) Bongaigaon Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd V/s CIT 251 ITR 329 (SC) 4. The FAA also dismissed the appeal of the assessee after considering the submissions and contentions as…

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2