{"id":65036,"date":"2026-10-15T06:21:19","date_gmt":"2026-10-15T00:51:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/citit-v-standard-chartered-grindlays-ltd-2025-171-taxmann-com-183-2026-486-itr-564-delhihc\/"},"modified":"2026-10-15T06:21:19","modified_gmt":"2026-10-15T00:51:19","slug":"citit-v-standard-chartered-grindlays-ltd-2025-171-taxmann-com-183-2026-486-itr-564-delhihc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/citit-v-standard-chartered-grindlays-ltd-2025-171-taxmann-com-183-2026-486-itr-564-delhihc\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT(IT) v. Standard Chartered Grindlays Ltd. [2025] 171 taxmann.com 183 \/[2026] 486 ITR 564 (Delhi)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Assessee is a foreign bank who incurred expenses outside India for opening branches of the Assessee bank outside India to obtain foreign currency deposits\/funds from Non-Resident Indians (NRIs). The same was done as per RBI circulars giving foreign currency deposits of NRI&#8217;s a favourable rate of interest as against LIBOR rates of interest, as the country was going through a balance of payments crisis. The AO treated the expenses as head office expenses. The High Court, following the order passed in the case of CIT v. Sirpur Paper Mills [1999] 103 Taxman 352 (SC) and DIT v. ANZ Grindlays Bank [2024] 167 taxmann.com 597(Delhi)(HC) <em>\u00a0<\/em>held that the funds were used for the permanent establishment of the bank in India and the resulting income was already taxed in India. Therefore, there was no reason to disallow the deduction. The revenue appeal was dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 44C: Non-residents-Head office expenditure-Expenditure on opening offshore branches of bank-money brought to India in foreign currency as per RBI circular-AO treated the expense as office expenses-Held, income from said transaction already taxed in India-Revenue Appeal dismissed. [S. 36(1)(iv), 40A(9), 40A(10), (260A R. 87, 88] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-65036","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-gUY","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65036","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65036"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65036\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":65037,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65036\/revisions\/65037"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65036"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65036"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65036"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}