Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Tax & Customs LawSupreme Court of India

The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Not available · 2024 INSC 781Decided 16 Oct 2024
Not available
Justice Abhay S. Oka · Justice Pankaj Mithal

Background

Banks that trade in government securities and bonds often buy them mid-way through an interest-accrual period, paying the seller a price that includes the interest already accrued since the last interest payment date: this component is called "broken period interest." The core question in this batch of appeals (led by Bank of Rajasthan's case) was whether a bank holding such securities as stock-in-trade (i.e., as part of its trading business, not as a long-term investment) could deduct this broken-period interest as a business expense when computing its taxable income, or whether the tax authorities were right to treat it as a capital cost that couldn't be deducted.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that where securities are held by a bank as stock-in-trade, the broken period interest paid on their purchase is deductible as a revenue expense, following the reasoning previously accepted in cases like HDFC Bank v. CIT. Applying this principle across the batch, the Court allowed Bank of Rajasthan's appeal and restored the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's orders permitting the deduction, and disposed of the remaining connected appeals in line with this reasoning (largely against the Revenue), while clarifying that securities held in the "Held to Maturity" (HTM) category needed separate treatment.

Lesson Learnt

For businesses like banks that treat certain assets as trading stock rather than fixed investments, ordinary costs of acquiring and dealing in that stock, even something as technical as "broken period interest", are treated as everyday business expenses for tax purposes, not as capital costs that can't be written off.

The Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware