The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s. Spectra Shares AND Scrips Ltd.,

PDF · subscribers
ITTA/574/2012HC TelanganaHBHC01048307201217 July 20133 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of the Income Tax Act provisions merely because the purchaser assessed the valuation for purchase price. The Supreme Court judgment in CIT vs. Electric Control Gear Manufacturing Company was found squarely applicable.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found no evidence that the assessee negotiated prices for plant and machinery individually. The Tribunal relied on a Supreme Court judgment to allow the assessee's claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is entitled to the benefit of Income Tax Act provisions when the purchaser assesses the valuation for purchase price, and if a specific Supreme Court judgment is applicable.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 28 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI

I.T.T.A. No. 574 of 2012

DATE: 17.07.2013

Between:

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III Hyderabad. … Appellant

And

M/s. Spectra Shares & Scrips Limited, Hyderabad. … Respondent

This court made the following:

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI

I.T.T.A. No. 574 of 2012

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)

We have heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned counsel for the appellant and gone through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal on fact found that there is nothing available on record to suggest that the assessee had negotiated the price for plant, machinery etc., individually. Merely because the purchaser assessed the valuation for the purpose of fixing the purchase price, the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The learned Tribunal has followed the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Electric Control Gear Manufacturing Company[1] and ultimately found that the said judgment is squarely applicable to the present case. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the same, as no point of law involved in this matter. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

______________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ

_______________

G. ROHINI, J

Date: 17.07.2013 ES [1] 227 ITR 278

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →