Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

227 ITR 172Supreme Court of India1997#96 most cited

What is Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Interest income earned on deposits, particularly before the commencement of business operations or as a requirement for business licensing, is taxable as "income from other sources" under Section 56, and cannot be treated as business income or set off against interest on borrowed funds.

621

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,887 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT · 227 ITR 172 · Section 28 · Section 56 · Section 57 · income from other sources · business income · interest income · commencement of business · capitalization of interest · year of expenditure claim

Also reported as

141 CTR 387

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 143(3)Section 41(1)Section 14ASection 40(a)(ia)Section 37(1)Section 147Section 28(iv)

Issues it is cited on

section 57profits and gains of business or professionsection 56section 32revenue expenditureincome from other sourcessection 28section 37(1)capital expendituresection 43section 37previous year

Judgments citing Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Rohtak Panipat Tollway Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1938/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Shukla, Sr. D.R
Section 271Section 56

…earned could not be taxed as income from other sources in hands of assessee. While passing the ruling, the Tribunal made the following observations: We note that the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals [1997] 227 ITR 172 and that of Bokaro Steel Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 315. The test which permeates through the judgment of the Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali I.T.A No. 1938/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No. 7 Dy. CIT vs. M/s. Rohtak Panipat Tollway Pvt. Ltd. Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT [1997] 227 ITR 172/93 Taxman 502, is that if funds have been borrowed for s…

Rbl Hotels Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known Ys Lebara Hotels Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Cir-4(1), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 3429/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Aravindan & Shri. PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(34)Section 3Section 71(1)

…lowable expenditure. 7.2 However, Ld. CIT(A) formed an opinion that business expenditure was required to be capitalized along with the cost of the hotel building as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd (227 ITR 172). Reliance was also placed on various other decisions as enumerated in the impugned order to support the said conclusion. Finally, the appeal was dismissed which is under challenge before us. 7.3 Similar are the facts in AY 2013-14, wherein the business expenditure of Rs.495.83 Lacs has been disallowed and other income has been assessed as ‘Incom…

Rbl Hotels Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known Ys Lebara Hotels Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ACIT, Corp Cir-4(1), Chennai

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 3428/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri S. Aravindan & Shri. PawanFor Respondent: Shri Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(34)Section 3Section 71(1)

…lowable expenditure. 7.2 However, Ld. CIT(A) formed an opinion that business expenditure was required to be capitalized along with the cost of the hotel building as per the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd (227 ITR 172). Reliance was also placed on various other decisions as enumerated in the impugned order to support the said conclusion. Finally, the appeal was dismissed which is under challenge before us. 7.3 Similar are the facts in AY 2013-14, wherein the business expenditure of Rs.495.83 Lacs has been disallowed and other income has been assessed as ‘Incom…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd

In the result we answer the question as framed in favour of the assessee and

ITA/177/2022HC Delhi01 Jun 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

…mits that the ITAT has failed to consider the various decisions of the Apex Court This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002183 ITA 177/2022 Page 2 of 3 including Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Limited vs CIT, (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). 3. This Court vide its order in ITA 70/2022 dated 31st March, 2022 dismissed a similar appeal preferred by the Revenue against the ITAT order passed in assessee’s own case for the earlier Assessment Year 2012-13. This Court in ITA 70/2022 held that “ ......The judgment passed in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals (supra) referred to and relied upon…

Simplex Naigai Castings Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 690/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaranm/S. Simplex Naigai Castings P. Ltd. The Income Tax Officer No. 116-C/1, Khb Colonhy, Ward - 6(1)(2) Vs. 5Th Block, Koramangala Bengaluru Bengaluru 560034 Pan – Aaucs0627G Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sreehari KutsaFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale

…interest income of Rs.47,49,673/- under the head income from other sources. The Ld CIT(A) confirmed the assessment of interest income following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilisers Ltd (1997) (227 ITR 172)(SC). 5. I notice that the Ld CIT(A) has confirmed the assessment by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court. Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by Ld CIT(A). 6. Though the assessee has raised a legal ground challenging the scope of assessment proceedings, no material was placed before me i…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 350/BIL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tly brought to tax by the A.O as the income of the assessee from other sources. In support of his aforesaid claim the Ld. DR had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). On the basis of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. DR that not only the A.O had validly assumed jurisdiction and reopened the case of assessee company but also, addition made by him was duly justified. 12. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the Learned CIT(A). Authorized Representatives of th…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 349/BIL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tly brought to tax by the A.O as the income of the assessee from other sources. In support of his aforesaid claim the Ld. DR had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). On the basis of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. DR that not only the A.O had validly assumed jurisdiction and reopened the case of assessee company but also, addition made by him was duly justified. 12. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the Learned CIT(A). Authorized Representatives of th…

M/S Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Income Tax Officer, 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 348/BIL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 348, 349 & 350/Rpr/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2012-13 Cmdc Icpl Coal Limited House No.382, Sunder Nagar, Raipur-492 013 (C.G.) Pan : Aadcc4374P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer 3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri G.N Singh, Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…tly brought to tax by the A.O as the income of the assessee from other sources. In support of his aforesaid claim the Ld. DR had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC). On the basis of his aforesaid contentions, it was submitted by the Ld. DR that not only the A.O had validly assumed jurisdiction and reopened the case of assessee company but also, addition made by him was duly justified. 12. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the contentions of the Learned CIT(A). Authorized Representatives of th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5318/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2011-12
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘G‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Ultratech Cement Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4) Limited Room No.902, Pratishtha Aditya Birla Centre Bhavan, 9th Floor A-Wing, 2nd Floor Old CGO Building Annexe S.K.Ahire Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Worli, Mumbai – 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AANCS3843F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Jasbir Chauhan Assessee by Shri Madhur Agrawal Date of Hearing 21/02/2022 Date of Pronouncement 05/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): Thes…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(4), Mumbai vs. Samruddhi Cement Limited (Since Amalgamated Into M/S.Ultratech Cement Limited), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4835/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2022AY 2010-11
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 43Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘G‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Ultratech Cement Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4) Limited Room No.902, Pratishtha Aditya Birla Centre Bhavan, 9th Floor A-Wing, 2nd Floor Old CGO Building Annexe S.K.Ahire Marg Mumbai – 400 020 Worli, Mumbai – 400 030 PAN/GIR No.AANCS3843F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Jasbir Chauhan Assessee by Shri Madhur Agrawal Date of Hearing 21/02/2022 Date of Pronouncement 05/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): Thes…

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1263/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2009-10 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Dcit, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Bmtc Complex, Circle – 11(2), K H Road, Shanti Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 027. Pan : Aaacb 4881 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. A. Shankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 250

…tro Rail after its installation by issuance of tickets to customers. This profit motive is germane to the project as against the welfare motive of KUIDFC. The A.O. has thereafter rightly applied the ratio of the decision of Tuticorin Alkali case Page 6 of 22 227 ITR 172 to bring the interest earned of Rs.10,57,20,194/- to tax net. Besides the appellant in earlier A.Y. had shown these interest as income and paid tax thereon since 1995. Facts being same, it should not have opted to go out of tax net. In view of the above, I (see) no reason to interfere in the order of the AO. 7. However, the AR, at the appellate s…

DCIT Cent. Cir 5(3), Mumbai vs. Shri Parth Vinod Gadhiya, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in respect of A

ITA 2248/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

For Respondent: Shri A. K. Kardam, CIT D.R
Section 10(38)Section 132(1)

…rued, despite the fact that the Assessing officer has considered receipts only to the extent offered by the assessee as income and thereby ignoring the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd us CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically mentioned that accounting practice cannot override any provisions of the Act though this is a case where the income was already received as per the impounded records and is taxable U/s 5 of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in allowing expenses of R…

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)

…usiness income against which project expenses could be set off. 7. In support of his contentions, ld. AO has relied on following authorities of Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts as under: (i) Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. vs. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC). (ii) Whistling Woods International Ltd. (16 Taxmann 242 (Mum.) (2011) (iii) DY.CIT vs. Allied Construction 106 TTJ 595 (Del.) SB). 6 ITA No. 1421/Mum/2021 (A.Y. 2013-14) (iv) A.C. Nielson Research Services (P.) Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT 120 TTJ (Mum) 918 (Mum). (v) Dy.CIT vs. Times Guarantee Ltd. - 131 TTJ (Mum) 257. (vi) Traco Cable Co. Ltd. vs…

Orient Green Power Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeals stands allowed

ITA 1216/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajith Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…s, the expenditure claimed by the assessee was disallowed and other income was assessed as ‘income from other sources’. For the same, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd (227 ITR 172). 5.3 Similar are the facts in AY 2010-11. During assessment proceedings, the assessee defended its stand. However, Ld. AO noted that the assessee company’s bio-mass power plant was synchronized to grid only from 04.07.2011. Therefore, the assessee ITA No.1215 & 1216/Chny/2017 was not ready to produce the power till 04.07.2011 and the business w…

Orient Green Power Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

The appeals stands allowed

ITA 1215/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajith Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
Section 143(3)

…s, the expenditure claimed by the assessee was disallowed and other income was assessed as ‘income from other sources’. For the same, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd (227 ITR 172). 5.3 Similar are the facts in AY 2010-11. During assessment proceedings, the assessee defended its stand. However, Ld. AO noted that the assessee company’s bio-mass power plant was synchronized to grid only from 04.07.2011. Therefore, the assessee ITA No.1215 & 1216/Chny/2017 was not ready to produce the power till 04.07.2011 and the business w…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, -7 vs. M/S Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd

In the result we answer the question as framed in favour of the assessee and

ITA/70/2022HC Delhi31 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

…ITA No.70 /2022 Page 1 of 3 $~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 70/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, -7 ..... Appellant Through Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, senior standing counsel for the Revenue with Mr.Shailendra Singh and Mr.Udit Sharma, Advocates. versus M/S TRIUMPH REALTY PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr.Ajay Vohra, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Kavita Jha and Mr.Himanshu Aggarwal, Advocates. %…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, -7 vs. M/S Triumph Realty Pvt. Ltd

In the result we answer the question as framed in favour of the assessee and

ITA-70/2022HC Delhi31 Mar 2022

…ITA No.70 /2022 Page 1 of 3 $~25 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 70/2022 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, -7 ..... Appellant Through Ms.Vibhooti Malhotra, senior standing counsel for the Revenue with Mr.Shailendra Singh and Mr.Udit Sharma, Advocates. versus M/S TRIUMPH REALTY PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through Mr.Ajay Vohra, Sr.Advocate with Ms.Kavita Jha and Mr.Himanshu Aggarwal, Advocates. %…

DCIT, Central Circle 1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Antevorta Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5065/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
Section 143(3)Section 260A

…to tax on the ground that this sum was invested out of idle funds lying with the assessee and hence, the decision of the Hon‟ble 5 M/s. Antevorta Developers Pvt. Ltd., Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd., reported in 227 ITR 172 would come into operation. 3.6. Both the aforesaid action of the ld. AO were deleted by the ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Hiranandani Palace Residence Pvt. Ltd., in ITA No.4579/Mum/2013 dated 30/12/2015. 4. At the outset we find that first issue with regard to disallowan…

Jsw Steel Limited, Mumbai vs. Addlcit, Bangalore

858/M/2011

ITA 858/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Amarjit Singh () Assessment Year: 2007-08 Jsw Steel Limited, The Addl. Cit, Range 11, Jindal Mansion, 5A, Vs. Bangalore. Dr. G. Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dc. Cc.46, M/S Jsw Steel Ltd., R.No. 659, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Jindal Mansion, 5-A, Dr. G Bhavan, M.K. Road, Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Jsw Steel Ltd., Dcit, Central Circle 46, Jsw Centre, Bandra Kurla Vs. 6Th Flr., Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Complex, Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaacj 4323 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Danesh Bafna &For Respondent: Mr. Achal Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

…hat interest of Rs. 7,26,71,000/- is assessable as 'Business Income' and not 'Income from Other Sources', without taking into consideration the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. reported in 227 ITR 172. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to quantify the disallowance u/s 14A as per principle of proportion as against application of Rule 8D r.w.s14A as held by the A.O. 2.3 The assessee has also filed an additional ground on 24/04/2012, which is reproduced as under: “The above-…

DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Bhubaneswar vs. M/S. Radhikapur (West) Coal Mining (P) Limited, Bhubaneswar

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 12/CTK/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack08 Mar 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S.C.BhadraFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Goutam
Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/ S/SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Corporate Circle DCIT, Corporate Circle-1(1), Vs. M/s. Radhikapur (West) Coal M/s. Radhikapur (West) Coal Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. Mining Pvt Ltd., 52, Said Nagar, Mining Pvt Ltd., 52, Said Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. No.AAECR 9135 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. (…