State Bank of Mysore v. DCIT

273 ITR 510High Court2005#4487 most cited

What is State Bank of Mysore v. DCIT authority for?

The case is cited for the principle that lower authorities' orders must be considered when dealing with tax matters.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

State Bank of Mysore v. DCIT · 273 ITR 510 · assessment procedure · lower authorities · tax appeals · RBI master circular · government securities

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Judgments citing State Bank of Mysore v. DCIT

City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam vs. JCIT, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 2034/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1804/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1803/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1802/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1801/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…

ACIT, Kumbakonam vs. City Union Bank Limited, Kumbakonam

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1671/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

…, 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 in TC No. 1162 to 1168 dated 12.03.2012, observed that the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal has considered the interest paid on purchase of investments is Revenue expenditure and also relied on the decision of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., 273 ITR 510 (Mad). Subsequently, Revenue has challenged the decision of the Madras High Court and filed SLP in the Hon'ble Supreme Court and was dismissed. With these observations, :- 9 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 the Ld. CIT(A) considered the Broken Period Interest as Revenue expenditure and allowed the grounds of the ass…