10(2)(xv) of the Act. CIT v. Williamson Magor & Co Ltd.

117 ITR 581High Court1979#18775 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,254 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2021.

Judgments citing 10(2)(xv) of the Act. CIT v. Williamson Magor & Co Ltd.

The DCIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad vs. Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad

ITA 976/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &
Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…he sum of Rs. 12,000 paid by the assessee- company to 'A' was wholly and exclusively expended by it for the purposes of its business and was, hence, a deductible allowance within the meaning of section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. CIT vs Williamson Magor & Co Ltd, ( 117 ITR 581), Cal. In this case, the taxpayer who was acting as managing agent and secretaries of other companies was appointed as a secretary of Tukvar & Co (TCO) Ltd till 1957. In 1955, TCO was in need of funds. The taxpayer provided guarantee to the bank due to which TCO was provided overdraft facilities by the bank. In 1957, TCO defaulted in repayment to…

Ghcl Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 1042/AHD/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Mar 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Soparkar, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Mohd. Usman, CIR-D.R. &
Section 143(2)Section 144C(2)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 92C

…he sum of Rs. 12,000 paid by the assessee- company to 'A' was wholly and exclusively expended by it for the purposes of its business and was, hence, a deductible allowance within the meaning of section 10(2)(xv) of the Act. CIT vs Williamson Magor & Co Ltd, ( 117 ITR 581), Cal. In this case, the taxpayer who was acting as managing agent and secretaries of other companies was appointed as a secretary of Tukvar & Co (TCO) Ltd till 1957. In 1955, TCO was in need of funds. The taxpayer provided guarantee to the bank due to which TCO was provided overdraft facilities by the bank. In 1957, TCO defaulted in repayment to…

D.C.I.T., Circle-3(1), Kolkata vs. Smt. Shikha Roy, Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1915/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Nov 2020AY 2016-17
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54ESection 54F

…transfer of On these facts, the issue is whether the transfer of tenancy rights is transfer of capital asset or not. 9. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of le Calcutta High Court in the case of A. Gasper vs. CIT A. Gasper vs. CIT reported in (1979) 117 ITR 581 (Cal.)., has held as follows: (1979) 117 ITR 581 (Cal.)., has held as follows:- “21. In view of the aforesaid facts, the contention of Mr, Banerjee 21. In view of the aforesaid facts, the contention of Mr, Banerjee, namely, that the , namely, that the monthly tenancy of the assessee was not a transferable property must fail both in monthly tenanc…

M/S. Stp Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 749/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Vs. Dcit, Circle-10, Kolkata M/S Stp Limited C/O. G.P. Agarwal & Associates, 7A, Kiran Shankar Ray Road, 2Nd Floor, Kol-1. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecs6339M .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D. K. Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…172 ITR 311. Besides Hon'ble High Court also referred to the following judgments: a) AR Krishnamurti -vs- CIT, 1989 176 ITR 417 (SC] b) Traders & Minors Ltd. [1955] 27 ITR 341 [Patna High Court] c) A. Gaspcr-vs-CIT 192 ITR 382 [SC] d) A. Gasper-vs-CIT [1979] 117 ITR 581 [Calcutta HC e) CIT-vs-Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 422 Thus it is evident that creation of sub lease rights would also amount to transfer of Leasehold Rights, under certain conditions. Whether the lessor continues getting rent even after the date of transfer is not relevant in deciding whether transfer has taken place. Perusal of the two…

10(2)(xv) of the Act. CIT v. Williamson Magor & Co Ltd. (117 ITR 581) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax