South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

240 ITR 24High Court1999#3956 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.

30

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 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 250Section 56Section 92CA

Issues it is cited on

income from other sourcescompanyindiabusinessinterest

Judgments citing South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. v. CIT

Horizon Cuntry Wide Logistics Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 1(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6328/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Amit Shukla (Jm)

Section 35DSection 56

…icer, by pacing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. (227 ITR 172) and also on the decision rendered by Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. (240 ITR 24) held that interest income is assessable as income of the assessee under the head “income from other sources” u/s. 56 of the Act. Accordingly, he assessed the above said income of ` 3,28,17,073/- as income of the assessee under the head income from other sources. The assessee contested this addition before the learned CIT(A) but did not get any fa…

Addl CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petrikum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6421/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

Addl CIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 2686/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India Internaitonal, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6322/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 1741/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4658/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4657/MUM/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

ACIT 19(3), Mumbai vs. Petroleum India International, Mumbai

In the result, all appeals of revenue are allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4439/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2015AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./Ita Nos.4439,4657&4658/Mum/2009

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 91Section 91(1)

…hat the interest was assessable under the head “business income’ was rejected by the AO in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali’s case on the footing that the said decision was also followed by the Hon’ble Madras High Court in 240 ITR 24. 8. By the impugned order the CIT(A) held that interest income is to be assessed as income from business. Precise observation of the CIT(A) was as under :- “The facts stated in Para 6.3.1 above show that the interest received by the appellant on the funds earmarked and kept aside for mega business projects was inextricably connected with its busin…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jaypee Dsc Ventures Ltd

Accordingly, the same stands dismissed

ITA/357/2010HC Delhi11 Mar 2011

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…ITA 357/2010 Page 1 of 18 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 357/2010 Reserved on : 16th December, 2010 % Date of decision: 11th March, 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-IV ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing Counsel versus Jaypee DSC Ventures Ltd. ..... Respondent Through: Ms. S. Krishnan, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE…

Commissioner of Income Tax-V N vs. Damanjit Singh

ITA/166/2000HC Delhi12 Jan 2007

…of machinery required for setting up a plant. It was held that the interest earned was a capital receipt since the deposit was incidental to the acquisition of assets. The decision of the Madras High Court in South India Shipping Corporation v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 24 (Mad) was also rendered in the context of treating certain receipts not as business income but income from other sources for the purposes of Section 56 read with Section 57(iii) of the Act. 11. It is true that none of these cases considered or discussed a clause similar to clause (baa) of the Explanation below sub-section (4C) of Section…