United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. v. CIT

349 ITR 690Supreme Court of India2012#11540 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2023.

Judgments citing United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. v. CIT

Guru Nanak Milk Products, Ferozepur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar

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

ITA 132/ASR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 Nov 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 132Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 153BSection 153CSection 250(6)

…wance of interest expense should be made in the hands of assessee concern. Sir, in this regard reliance is placed on the decision of Supreme Court of India in the case of Vardhman Polytex Ltd. V/s CIT, (2012) 254 CTR (SC) 102 : (2012) 79 DTR (SC) 41 : (2012) 349 ITR 690 (SC) : (2012) 210 Taxman 261 (SC), in which it was held as under: Business expenditure—Interest on borrowed capital—Borrowings for acquisition of capital assets not put to use in the relevant year— Interest paid in respect of borrowings utilised for acquisition of capital assets which were not put to use in the relevant year is allowable as deduc…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffee Day Global Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 816/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree C. Ramesh, C. AFor Respondent: Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR
Section 36

…t the expenditure is incurred to expand the business of the assessee and therefore, it cannot be considered as having created a new asset. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the case of M/s Vardhman Polytex Ltd. Vs. CIT, 349 ITR 690 and also in the case of DCIT vs. Core Healthcare Limited, 298 ITR 194. He also submitted that this tribunal order in A. Y. 2010 – 11 has been followed by the tribunal in A. Y. 2013 – 14 and 2014 – 15 also in ITA Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 dated 24.02.2020. He submitted a copy of this tribunal order and drawn our attention to para no. 8.9.1. 5. Th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffee Day Global Limited, Bangalore

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 815/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree C. Ramesh, C. AFor Respondent: Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR
Section 36

…t the expenditure is incurred to expand the business of the assessee and therefore, it cannot be considered as having created a new asset. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of Hon’ble apex court rendered in the case of M/s Vardhman Polytex Ltd. Vs. CIT, 349 ITR 690 and also in the case of DCIT vs. Core Healthcare Limited, 298 ITR 194. He also submitted that this tribunal order in A. Y. 2010 – 11 has been followed by the tribunal in A. Y. 2013 – 14 and 2014 – 15 also in ITA Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 dated 24.02.2020. He submitted a copy of this tribunal order and drawn our attention to para no. 8.9.1. 5. Th…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffeeday Global Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3041/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coffee Day Global Limited, Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), No.23/2, Coffeeday Square, 3Rd Floor, C.R. Building, Vittal Mallya Road, Queen’S Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Bengaluru-560 001. [Pan: Aabca 5291P]

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 43A

…that no portion of the interest on borrowed capital could have been disallowed under the provisions of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 (4) Reliance was placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Vardhaman Polytex Ltd Vs. CIT (2012) 349 ITR 690 (SC) on the issue wherein it was held as follows:. “whether interest paid in respect of borrowings for acquisition of capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year can be permitted as allowable deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the income tax act 1961.” The question has been answered in favour of the assessee. (5) The Ld. AR…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffeeday Global Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 3040/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Coffee Day Global Limited, Income-Tax, Central Circle-1(3), No.23/2, Coffeeday Square, 3Rd Floor, C.R. Building, Vittal Mallya Road, Queen’S Road, Bengaluru-560 001. Bengaluru-560 001. [Pan: Aabca 5291P]

Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 43A

…that no portion of the interest on borrowed capital could have been disallowed under the provisions of the Act. I.T.A. Nos.3040 & 3041/Bang/2018 (4) Reliance was placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of M/s.Vardhaman Polytex Ltd Vs. CIT (2012) 349 ITR 690 (SC) on the issue wherein it was held as follows:. “whether interest paid in respect of borrowings for acquisition of capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year can be permitted as allowable deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the income tax act 1961.” The question has been answered in favour of the assessee. (5) The Ld. AR…

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Vodafone Shared Services Ltd., (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Shared Services Ltd.), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 124/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

…e section requires is that the assessee must borrow the capital for the purpose of his business....." The above principles were subsequently followed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. V CIT (349 ITR 690). Hence, respectfully following the above judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hold that interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on ECB used for acquisition of capital assets is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the proposed addition of interest expenditure incurred by asse…

Vodafone Business Services Limited ( Formerly Known As Vodafone Shared Services Limited), Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1923/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

…e section requires is that the assessee must borrow the capital for the purpose of his business....." The above principles were subsequently followed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. V CIT (349 ITR 690). Hence, respectfully following the above judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hold that interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on ECB used for acquisition of capital assets is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the proposed addition of interest expenditure incurred by asse…

The Jt. CIT, Range-8, Ahmedabad vs. Vodafone Shared Services Ltd., (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Shared Services Ltd.), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 162/AHD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

…e section requires is that the assessee must borrow the capital for the purpose of his business....." The above principles were subsequently followed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. V CIT (349 ITR 690). Hence, respectfully following the above judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hold that interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on ECB used for acquisition of capital assets is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the proposed addition of interest expenditure incurred by asse…

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Vodafone Shared Services Ltd., (Formerly Known As Vodafone Essar Shared Services Ltd.), Ahmedabad

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 1468/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadsl.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr.Adv. with Shri Bandish SoparkarFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR

…e section requires is that the assessee must borrow the capital for the purpose of his business....." The above principles were subsequently followed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. V CIT (349 ITR 690). Hence, respectfully following the above judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we hold that interest expenditure incurred by the assessee on ECB used for acquisition of capital assets is eligible for deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the proposed addition of interest expenditure incurred by asse…

United Phosphorous Ltd. (299 ITR 9) and Vardhman Polytex Ltd. v. CIT (349 ITR 690) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax