C W Spencer v. ITO

37 ITR 107High Court#20636 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2024.

Sections most often in play

Section 132 Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 250 Section 28 Section 37(1)

Judgments citing C W Spencer v. ITO

DCIT Central Circle 6(1), Mumbai, Nariman Point Mumbai vs. Gnp Realty LLP, Thane

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 3105/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayassessment Year: 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule, D.R

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 250

…f Sh. Girish Pawar. 9.11 Apart from the above, there are various judicial precedents which have held that the same income cannot be taxed twice in the hands of two separate entities: • Laxmipat Singhania v CIT (72 ITR 291) (SC) • Joti Prasad Agarwal vs. ITO [37 ITR 107] [AII] • CIT vs. Murlidhar Jhawar & Purna Ginning and Pressing Factory [60 ITR 95] 9.12 M/s GNP Realty LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership formed and incorporated on 21.12.2017 under The Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008 with a main object of acquiring, exploring, prospecting, developing and operating into business of Mining activities.…

DCIT, Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas (P) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1885/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

…y. Undistributed profits of a company are still the profits of the company. They constitute the income of the company. Until the company declares dividend, no portion of these profits can become the income of the shareholders [Kindly refer C W Spencer v ITO - 37 ITR 107 (Mad)]. 8.4. As per the aforesaid principle, the dividend income would constitute income in the hands of the shareholders and would be chargeable to tax under section 4 of the Act. The Finance Ministry, in the ‘Memorandum Explaining the Provisions of the Finance Bill 1997 to 2020’, has stated that for administrative convenience, the incidence of t…

D.C.I.T., Circle-10(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Indian Oil Petronas Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1884/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

DCIT (It) 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Dipendu Bapalal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4751/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

Section 114Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 6

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM ITA No.4751/Mum/2016 & 4752/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year :2006-07 & 2007-08) DCIT (IT) – 4(2)(1), Vs. Shri Dipendu Bapalal Shah Scindia House C/o. Sampat & Mehta Ballard Pier, Chartered Accountants N.M.Road, B-501/502, 11 Sarvoday Mumbai – 400 038 W.E. Highway, Bandra(E) Mumbai – 400 051 PAN/GIR No. BNBPS0099E Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue by Shri Rajat Mittal Assessee by Shri Rohan Shah, Shri Hardik Choksi, Shri Vijay Riyani & Ms. Divya Jeswant Date of Hearing 15/06/2018 Date of Pronouncement 19/06/201…