Thukral Regal Shoes v. CIT

72 Taxmann.com 192High Court2016#9992 most cited

What is Thukral Regal Shoes v. CIT authority for?

A deduction for interest expenditure on borrowed funds used for acquiring assets cannot be allowed if the assessee fails to establish that such assets were put to use for the firm's business purposes.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,315 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Thukral Regal Shoes v. CIT · section 36(1)(iii) · interest expenditure · borrowed funds · assets · put to use · business purposes · deduction disallowed · capital sufficiency · proviso to section 36(i)(iii)

Also reported as

391 ITR 119

Sections most often in play

Section 127Section 132Section 132ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 245c(1)section 36(1)(ii)settlement applicationbogus share capitalincome tax settlement commissioncolourable deviceblock of assetsput to usesection 69bsection 127section 153bsection 36(1)(iii)

Judgments citing Thukral Regal Shoes v. CIT

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 144/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुर्ाा राि, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T(SS)A. No.5, 6, 7, 8 & 9/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years. 2008-09 to 2012-13) DCIT, Vs. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Central Circle-1, Chattisgarh. Visakhapatnam. PAN: AADCM5858Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 140, 141, 142, 143 & 144/Viz/…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 143/VIZ/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुर्ाा राि, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T(SS)A. No.5, 6, 7, 8 & 9/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years. 2008-09 to 2012-13) DCIT, Vs. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Central Circle-1, Chattisgarh. Visakhapatnam. PAN: AADCM5858Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 140, 141, 142, 143 & 144/Viz/…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 142/VIZ/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुर्ाा राि, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T(SS)A. No.5, 6, 7, 8 & 9/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years. 2008-09 to 2012-13) DCIT, Vs. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Central Circle-1, Chattisgarh. Visakhapatnam. PAN: AADCM5858Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 140, 141, 142, 143 & 144/Viz/…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 141/VIZ/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुर्ाा राि, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T(SS)A. No.5, 6, 7, 8 & 9/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years. 2008-09 to 2012-13) DCIT, Vs. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Central Circle-1, Chattisgarh. Visakhapatnam. PAN: AADCM5858Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 140, 141, 142, 143 & 144/Viz/…

Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Chhattisgarh vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 140/VIZ/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri MV Prasad, CAFor Respondent: Dr Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 245C(1)Section 245D

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVN” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुर्ाा राि, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T(SS)A. No.5, 6, 7, 8 & 9/Viz/2025 (धनिाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years. 2008-09 to 2012-13) DCIT, Vs. Maa Mahamaya Industries Limited, Central Circle-1, Chattisgarh. Visakhapatnam. PAN: AADCM5858Q (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 140, 141, 142, 143 & 144/Viz/…

M/S Acb (India) Power Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 82/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms Rakhi Vimal, DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…ely no findings recorded by the Tribunal that interests free advances were made by the assessee to sister concerns for its business purposes. That case was of advances whereas the case in hand is of investment. 17. Similarly, the case of Thukral Regal Shoes 391 ITR 119 was of loan wherein the assessee claimed that properties were purchased in the name of partners and property was made available to the assessee firm and in that case, the Assessing Officer categorically y found that assets purchased by partners were not put to use at least during the year under consideration. The decisions relied upon by the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mrg Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4070/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri P.K. Mishra, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…D.R. relied upon the Order of the A.O. and submitted that advance have reduced in assessment year under appeal and relied upon the following decisions : 1. Punjab Stainless Steel Inds. vs., CIT [2010] 324 ITR 396 (Del.) 2. Thukral Regal Shoes vs., CIT [2017] 391 ITR 119 (P&H) 11 ITA.No.4070/Del./2014 M/s. MRG Developers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 3. Abhishek Industries Ltd., vs., CIT [2006] 286 ITR 1 (P&H) 4. CIT vs., R Mohan 2011-TIOL-687-HC-MAD-IT. 5. CIT vs., Cornerstone Exports (P.) Ltd., [2016] 238 Taxman 465 (Gujarat). 14. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the Assessee relied upon the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)…

Super Auto Centre, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 28(1), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7709/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y.: 2014-15

For Appellant: SH. Rohit Tiwari, AdvFor Respondent: MS. Ekta Vishnoi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y.: 2014-15 Super Auto Centre, VS. ITO, Ward-28(1), Indian Oil Petroleum Pump, New Delhi Sriniwaspuri, Ring Road, New Delhi – 65 (PAN: AAPFS7207N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : SH. Rohit Tiwari, Adv. Department by : MS. Ekta Vishnoi, Sr. DR. O R D E R This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the Order dated 25.9.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A)-10, New Delhi pertaining to assessment year 2014-15. Originally the assessee has filed the 09 grounds of appeal running into 8 pages. But on asking…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Vs Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Block-B, Golf Course Road, Circle-9(1), New Delhi. Sector-54, Vatika Towers, Gurgaon. Pan: Aaacf9776H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 12.03.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.04.2019 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 9Th October, 2015 Of The Cit(A)-3, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Despite Service Of Notice, None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. It Was Further Seen That On The Previous Occasions Also Nobody Was Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Therefore, This Appeal Is Being Decided On The Basis Of The Material Available On Record & After Hearing The Ld. Dr. 3. Ground Of Appeal No.1 By The Revenue Reads As Under:-

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 ACIT, Vs Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., 1st Floor, Block-B, Golf Course Road, Circle-9(1), New Delhi. Sector-54, Vatika Towers, Gurgaon. PAN: AAACF9776H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms Rinku Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.03.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 16.04.2019 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 9th October, 2015 of the CIT(A)-3, New Delhi, relati…

Suresh Kumar Garg, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 47(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 845/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2014-15 Suresh Kumar Garg, Vs. Ito, 2629A, Naya Bazar, Ward-47(1), New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aafpg4752Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath & Shri V. Raj Kumar, Advocates Revenue By : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2019

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath &For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. DR

…t of any credit balance available with assessee firm it was held that in impugned order passed by authorities below was to be upheld. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court Thukral Regal Shoes vs CIT(2016) taxmann.com 192 (P&H) (2016) 241 Taxman 361 (P&H) (2017) 391 ITR 119 (P&H) (2016) 290 CTR 596 (P&H) where it is held that where assessee firm failed to establish that properties purchased by its partners were put to use by firm, deduction on interest expenditure on borrowed fund could not be allowed in view of proviso to section 36(i)(iii). In the light of discussion above, I do not find any reason to interfere wi…

M/S. Delhi Gujarat Fleet Carrier, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 1680/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishia Y 2011-12 M/S. Delhi Gujarat Fleet Carrier Vs Dcit 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle I(1) Gurgaon Gurgaon (Pan Aaccd6847K) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 31Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A Y 2011-12 M/s. Delhi Gujarat Fleet Carrier Vs DCIT 1/43, Shivaji Nagar, Circle I(1) Gurgaon Gurgaon (PAN AACCD6847K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Rohit Jain, Advocate Respondent by: Ms. Ashima Neb, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30/01/2018 Date of pronouncement 23/04/2018 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Accountant Member 1. This appeal is filed by assessee against order of Ld. CIT (A), Gurgaon dated 01.01.2015 for A. Y. 2011-12 raising following grounds o…

Thukral Regal Shoes v. CIT (72 Taxmann.com 192) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax