CGT v. Cawasji Jehangir Co. (P.) Ltd.

106 ITR 390High Court1977#18717 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2022.

Judgments citing CGT v. Cawasji Jehangir Co. (P.) Ltd.

VODAFONE IDEA LTD (ERSTWHILE ADITYA BIRLA TELECOM LTD),MUMBAI vs. PCIT-CIRCLE 5, MUMBAI

ITA 662/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blevodafone Idea Limited V. Pcit – Circle 5 {Erstwhile Known As Aditya Birla Telecom Limited} Room No. 515, 5Thfloor Birla Centurion, 10Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Plot No. 794, B Wing Mumbai - 400020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg Worli, Mumbai – 400030 Pan: Aaacb2100P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By Shri J. D. Mistry : Shri Madhur Aggarwal & Shri Ninad Patade Department Represented By : Shri Achal Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 263

…imited transfer and not capital gains tax implications arises for the distributing company 5.1.6 Attention at this juncture is invited to the jurisdictional Bombay High Court ruling in the case of Commissioner of Gift-tax v. CawasyJehangir Co. (P) Ltd. (1977) 106 ITR 390 (Bombay). wherein the Bombay High Court relied on the Apex Court decision in the case of Madurai Mills (supra) and held that distribution of its assets by a company to its shareholders upon reduction of its capital cannot amount to transfer The relevant extract of the decision is reproduced as under "It is true that a company is, in law, a separa…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA)

ITA/144/2021HC Delhi16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 11Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)

…he consideration that passed between the parties can be considered to be reasonable or fair, it cannot be considered to be inadequate. It is this aspect which has been pointed out by the Bombay High Court in CGT v. Cawasji Jehangir Co. (P.) Ltd. [1977] 106 ITR 390. …Vimadalal J., in his judgment at p. 398, made the following observations: ―In my opinion, the expression, ‗adequate consideration‘ has to be construed in a broad sense, and merely because there may be some difference between the consideration for a transfer, and the true This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 20…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) DELHI vs. HAMDRD NATIONAL FOUNDATION (INDIA)

ITA/115/2021HC Delhi16 Feb 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

Section 11Section 13(2)(b)Section 13(3)

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. SERUM INSTITUTE OF INDIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION,, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 621/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jan 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं. / Ita No.621/Pun/2016 अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year : 2005-06 वष"

For Appellant: Shri T.B. Vijaya Reddy and Shri Mukesh Jha, CIT-DRsFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Abhyankar

Section 10(21)Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 2(24)(iia)Section 35(1)(ii)

…ion of Delhi High Court as well various ITAT decisions . We have attached herewith Extract from operating portions of such decisions 15. We further rely on the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Gift Tax v. Cawasji Jahangir Co. (P) Ltd. reported in 106 ITR 390 in which it was held that "it permits the Court to take into consideration the basic principles in the allied laws. It does not compel the Court to apply the definition to a case to which having regard to the basic principles, it cannot apply. This case relates to Gift Tax in which the opening words for Section 2 "unless the context otherwise req…