← All Phrases

“interest on securities”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(28B) / ITR Schedule OS681 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest on securities is South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT (438 ITR 1), cited in 508 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest on securities

South Indian Bank Ltd. v. CIT
438 ITR 1 · 2021 · Supreme Court
508
citing judgments

The mixed fund theory is affirmed, holding that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A can be made if the assessee possesses sufficient non-interest bearing funds, such as capital and reserves, to cover investments made in tax-free securities.

CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.
389 ITR 68 · 2016 · High Court
192
citing judgments

Income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to its core activities and therefore not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.
383 ITR 490 · 2016 · High Court
175
citing judgments

If an assessee possesses interest-free funds exceeding investments in tax-free securities, it is presumed that investments are made from these own funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii). Additionally, weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is computed on the gross expenditure incurred, not net expenditure after reducing income earned.

CIT v. Southern Eastern Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.
390 ITR 524 · 2017 · High Court
170
citing judgments

Income from surplus funds invested in short-term deposits and securities by a cooperative credit society is not attributable to its activities and is therefore not eligible for exemption under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Vijaya Bank
187 ITR 541 · 1991 · Supreme Court
116
citing judgments

The 'broken period interest' paid on securities is considered part of the capital outlay for acquiring those securities and cannot be allowed as a revenue expenditure or business deduction. It must be capitalized.

American Express International Banking Corporation v. CIT
258 ITR 601 · 2002 · High Court
90
citing judgments

Interest paid by banks is allowable as a deduction in computing total income. The decision distinguished the Supreme Court's ruling in Vijaya Bank regarding the deductibility of such interest.

CIT v. Moni Kumar Subba
333 ITR 38 · 2011 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Notional interest on an interest-free security deposit cannot be considered as actual or deemed rent under Section 23(1) of the Act. For determining Annual Letting Value (ALV) under Section 23(1)(a), it must be in accordance with municipal laws, considering extraneous circumstances, but not exceeding the standard rent as per rent control legislation.

1. Bihar State Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
39 ITR 114 · 1960 · Supreme Court
76
citing judgments

Interest income earned by a co-operative bank from the investment of its surplus funds, including those statutorily required to be placed in approved securities, is attributable to its banking business and qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i).

Judgments citing interest on securities

Dbs Bank Ltd (Dbs Bank Ltd., India Branches Now Converted Into Dbs Bank India Ltd), Mumbai vs. DCIT (Int Txt)-2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3691/MUM/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwala/Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Permpurna, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(2)Section 37(1)Section 44C

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ or it is to fall under the head ‘profits and gains

DCIT (TDS) - 1(1), Mumbai, Cumballa Hills vs. Anand Rathi Commodities Limited, A Wing, Th Floor

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue as well as cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3919/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 2(28)Section 201

Hindu undivided family, who is responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income by way of interest on securities, shall, at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash

DCIT (TDS) - 1(1), Mumbai, Cumballa Hills vs. Ananad Rathi Commodities Limited, A Wing, Th Floor

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue as well as cross objections raised by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3900/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SMT RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

Section 2(28)Section 201

Hindu undivided family, who is responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income by way of interest on securities, shall, at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash

Assistant Commissioner, Mumbai vs. Idbi Bank Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 5250/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhri

For Appellant: Shri Chellamani NareshFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 250Section 36

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head 'income from other sources' or it is to fall under the head 'profits and gains

Atul Sharma, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6055/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh.Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Atul Sharma 207, Lawyers Vs. Acit Chamber, Delhi High Court Circle – 61 (1) New Delhi-110003 New Delhi Pan No.Aarps6964J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 57

responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income (by way of interest on securities) shall, at the time of credit of such Income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash or by issue

Sanjjay Saumyha, Salem vs. Principal CIT, Coimbatore

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 392/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.392/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Mrs. Sanjjay Saumyha Pcit बनाम/ 251 A, Omalur Main Road, Swarnapuri, Coimbatore-1. Vs. Salem-636 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aeyps-0117-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. R. Mohan Reddy (Cit) - Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-10-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 05-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri T. Banusekar (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. R. Mohan Reddy (CIT) - Ld. DR
Section 14Section 147Section 263Section 40

This was not done in assessee’s case which makes the order erroneous. The accumulated interest was to be treated as interest on securities and required to be brought to tax. The action of Ld. AO in accepting the return of income was not in accordance with law. Finally

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs. Hdfc Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 2716/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singhshri Sandeep Singh Karhailacit – 1(1)(1) 597, Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai Maharashtra–400020……………. Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Ms. Aarti VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 144Section 250Section 28Section 44

heads of income like income from other sources, capital ITA No. 2716/Mum/2023 & C.O. 22/Mum/2024 10 gains, house property or even interest on securities did not come into play and only first schedule had to be invoked to arrive at the profit, that both accounts- the Policyholders’ and Share-holders’ account ... Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the provisions of this Act relating to the computation of income chargeable under the head "interest on securities", "Income from house property", "Capital gains" or "Income from other sources", or in section 199 or in sections 28 to (43B), the profits and gains

DCIT-CC-5(3), Mumbai, Air India, Nariman Point vs. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3044/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234BSection 37(1)Section 44Section 69C

business.—Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the provisions of this Act relating to the computation of income chargeable under the head “Interest on securities”, “Income from house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections 28 to 43B, the profits ... previous year, but credit shall be given for the annual average of the income-tax paid by deduction at source from interest on securities or otherwise during such period.” 5. With this background of facts and applicable law, we first take up the appeal filed by the Revenue in which

Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT (A) 54, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1828/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Birla Sunlife Insurance Commissioner Of Income Tax Company Ltd., (A) – 54, 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One World Mumbai Vs. Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Aditya Birla Sunlife Tax – Central Circle – 5(3), Insurance Company Ltd., Mumbai 16Th Floor, Tower 1, One Vs. World Centre, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai – 400013 (Pan : Aabcb4623J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ronak Doshi, Ca Revenue : Shri Ajay Chandra, Cit Dr

For Appellant: Shri Ronak Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 234BSection 37(1)Section 44Section 69C

business.—Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the provisions of this Act relating to the computation of income chargeable under the head “Interest on securities”, “Income from house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in section 199 or in sections 28 to 43B, the profits ... previous year, but credit shall be given for the annual average of the income-tax paid by deduction at source from interest on securities or otherwise during such period.” 5. With this background of facts and applicable law, we first take up the appeal filed by the Revenue in which

Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Limited, Kota Gadepan vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Savina-Udaipur

ITA 694/JPR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Adv. & Shri Mukesh SoniFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 195Section 263Section 90

Bank [2017] 79 taxmann.com 342 (Punjab & Haryana)“: Section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Interest other than interest on securities - Assessment year 2012-13 - If organisation to which assessee paid interest was exempted from payment of tax, there was no need for deduction

Raithara Arecanut Marketing and Processing Co-Operative Society Limited, Bhadravathi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 and Tps, Shimoga

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1775/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Vasant Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri V Parithivel, JCIT
Section 60Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

after making the following deductions, namely:— (i) in the case of [dividends, 94[other than dividends referred to in section 115-O,]] [or interest on securities], any reasonable sum paid by way of commission or remuneration to a banker or any other person for the purpose of realising such dividend

Lankapalli Pacs Ltd, Lankapalli Village vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 364/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.364/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2020-21 ) Lankapalli Pacs Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 171, Lankapalli Village, Ward-1(1), Lankapalli Post, Vijayawada. Ghantasala Mandal-521131, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh-521131. Pan: Aaaal5410 (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri K. Siva Rama Kumar, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villurim, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 24/10/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Rama Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villurim, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

eligible for deduction U/s 80P of the Act. The Ld. Revenue Authorities relied on various case laws to state that income from interest on securities ear marked to reserve fund has been held not eligible for deduction u/s 80P. The Ld. Revenue Authorities have also placed relied on the decision

Infina Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 416/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Honbleι.Τ.Α. No. 413/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources' or it is to fall under the head 'profits and gains

Infina Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 415/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Honbleι.Τ.Α. No. 413/Mum/2024

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources' or it is to fall under the head 'profits and gains ... should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources' or it is to fall under the head 'profits and gains

Infina Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 2(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 414/MUM/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ or it is to fall under the head ‘profits and gains

Infina Finance Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Neac, Delhi

In the result, the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 413/MUM/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Krishna Kumar, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

should be withdrawn. A reading of this circular would make it clear that the issue was as to whether income by way of interest on securities shall be chargeable to income tax under the head ‘income from other sources’ or it is to fall under the head ‘profits and gains

Arjun Das Jasuja, Jabalpur vs. The CIT (It & Tp), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 796/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.796/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Arjun Das Jasuja The Cit (It & Tp) बनाम/ 16, Nayagaon, Rampur Circle-2 V/S. Jebalpur Ahmedabad Madhya Pradesh – 462 008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aehpj 3059 D अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sapan Usrethe, Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Nand Kumar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 15/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Nand Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 55(1)(b)

section 49, by the previous owner, but does not include any expenditure which is deductible in computing the income chargeable under the head "Interest on securities", "Income from house property", "Profits and gains of business or profession", or "Income from other sources", and the expression "improvement" shall be construed accordingly

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

ITA 4105/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) has erred in allowing the taxing of interest on securities on due basis, ignoring the fact that the assessee bank has been following mercantile system of accounting and therefore, interest on securities is to be accounted

DCIT 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) has erred in allowing the taxing of interest on securities on due basis, ignoring the fact that the assessee bank has been following mercantile system of accounting and therefore, interest on securities is to be accounted ... representative also gave example that if the assessee buys two securities for Rs 102/– each out of which Rs. 4/- is broken period Interest, one security sold on first March and on which broken period interest ₹ 4 is realized and another security remains unsold on which to 31st of March

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) has erred in allowing the taxing of interest on securities on due basis, ignoring the fact that the assessee bank has been following mercantile system of accounting and therefore, interest on securities is to be accounted ... representative also gave example that if the assessee buys two securities for Rs 102/– each out of which Rs. 4/- is broken period Interest, one security sold on first March and on which broken period interest ₹ 4 is realized and another security remains unsold on which to 31st of March