CIT v. Citi Bank N. A. (No. 1) (2024)469 ITR 273 (SC) Editorial : CIT v. Citi Bank N. A.(2003) 264 ITR 18 (Bom)(HC) CIT v.Citi Bank N. A. (No. 7) (2024)469 ITR 417 (SC) Editorial: CIT v. Citi Bank N. A (ITR.No. 265 of 1997 dt. 10-4-2003)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Banks-Government Securities-Interest paid for broken period-Allowable as revenue expenditure.

The High Court held that the interest paid for the broken period should not be considered as part of the purchase price, but should be allowed as revenue expenditure in the year of purchase of the securities under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. On appeal dismissing the appeal, the Court held that since the tax effect was neutral, the method of computation adopted by the assessee and accepted by the Revenue could not be interfered with. On the facts of the case, the judgment in Vijaya Bank Ltd. v. Add. CIT(1991) 187 ITR 541 (SC)  would have no application. (AY.1978-79) (AY.1983-84, 1984-85, 1987-88)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*