CIT v. Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd.

82 ITR 586Supreme Court of India1971#1163 most cited

What is CIT v. Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd. authority for?

The assessee has the burden to prove whether shares are held as investments or as stock-in-trade. This requires the assessee to produce evidence from their records clearly distinguishing between shares held for investment and those held as stock-in-trade.

98

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Associated Industrial Development Co. · 82 ITR 586 · capital gains vs business income · shares as investment or stock-in-trade · burden of proof on assessee · evidence from records · distinction of share holdings · Section 14 · Section 143 · classification of share transactions

Sections most often in play

Section 10(38)Section 114Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

short term capital gainsshort term capital gainlong term capital gainslong term capital gainsection 10transfercompanysection 143businesssection 14section 143(3)india

Judgments citing CIT v. Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd.

SAHARA INDIA CORP INVESTMENT LTD,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as above

ITA 1750/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraita No.1750/Del/2022, A.Y. 2017-18 Sahara India Corp Investment Assistant Commissioner Ltd., Of Income Tax, I-Kapoorthala Complex, Vs. Central Circle–1, Aliganj, Lucknow, Up Jhandewalan, New Delhi Pan: Aaacs1707R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Aditya Vohra, Advocate Sh. Arpit Goyal, Advocate Respondent By Sh. Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 Order Per Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Am This Appeal For The Assessment Year (‘Ay’) 2017-18 Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.06.2022 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-23, New Delhi [‘Cit(A)’].

…rt. The transaction was not carried out with the motive of profit. Hence, as per the Circular no. 4/2007, the appellant's case in that of capital gains and not business income. 16. In the case of CIT vs Associated Industrial Development Co. Pvt. Ltd., (1971) 82 ITR 586 (SC), the assessee was managing share of various companies and treated the transaction of same as capital gain. The revenue assessed it as business Income. The Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the case relied upon by the appellant is against him. 17. In the case of Equity Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd.,…

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 901/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…uctions, it is proposed to update the above instructions for the information of assessees as well as for guidance of the assessing officers. 5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in-trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any disti…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated above and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1024/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shris.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.C. Srivastava, Spl. Counsel for the Department
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 32Section 35Section 43B

…uctions, it is proposed to update the above instructions for the information of assessees as well as for guidance of the assessing officers. 5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in-trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any disti…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), DEHRADUN, SUBHASH ROAD, DEHRADUN vs. AMBEY ASSOCIATES, RAJPUR ROAD, DEHRADUN

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed being devoid of any merit

ITA 68/DDN/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun21 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR (Through VC)For Respondent: Shri Rajiv Sahni, Chartered Accountant
Section 143(3)

…d income in trading portfolio, comprising of stock in trade as ‘Business Income’. To further buttress his argument, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Company Ltd., 82 ITR 586. 6. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The short issue in present appeal by the Revenue is, Whether the income earned by the assessee from sale of shops which are part of property situated at 99 Rajpur Road, Dehradun is taxable under the head ‘Capital Gains’ or ‘Business of Income’.…

RAHUL BAJPAI,IDGAH CHOWK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), SHRI RAM PLAZA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 348/RPR/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Jan 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.348/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Rahul Bajpai Idgah Chowk, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh-495 001 Pan: Aexpb4410L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)

…the many factors determine whether any transactions on sale or purchase fall under the head from profit and gain from business or capital gain. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case CIT (Central), Kolkata vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd.(82 ITR 586) observed that whether a particular holding of shares is by way investment or forms stock-in-trade, is a matter within the knowledge of the assessee, when he holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its record as to whether it maintained any distinction between those shares which are its st…

ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), DELHI vs. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)

…oper records are maintained as per report u/s 142(A) issued by the special auditor. • Certain Shares are held as investment to get tax exemption u/s. 10(38) . 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co . Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC) . 11.1 The main contentions o f the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for…

M/S. INDI STOCK PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA- II

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and

ITA/49/2009HC Calcutta30 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…to business profits. The assessing officers were further advised that no single principle would be decisive and the total effect of all the principles should be considered to determine 1 (1971) 82 ITR 586 (SC) ITA NO. 49 OF 2009 REPORTABLE Page 4 of 11 whether in a given case, the shares are held by the assessee as investment or stock-in-trade. In the said circular, the CBDT took note of the d…

M/S. GAYAN TRADERS LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-II

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the

ITA/48/2009HC Calcutta30 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…the assessee as investment or stock-in-trade. In the said circular, the CBDT took note of the decision of the AAR and culled out 3 principles which were answered in the following terms:- 8 (1971) 82 ITR 586 (SC) ITA NO. 48 OF 2009 REPORTABLE Page 8 of 19 The Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) (288 ITR 641), referring to the decisions of the Supreme Court in several cases, has culled out the fol…

DCIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SMT YAMINI KHANDELWAL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 613/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…has taken into cognizance the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR), which are reproduced as under:- “5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: "Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in- trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any dist…

YAMINI KHANDEL WAL,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 425/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…has taken into cognizance the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR), which are reproduced as under:- “5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: "Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in- trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any dist…

DCIT, CIR-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SHRI SURAJ KHANDEL, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1105/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…has taken into cognizance the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR), which are reproduced as under:- “5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: "Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in- trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any dist…

SURAJ KHANDELWAL,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RG-36, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeals of both the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1069/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Sept 2022AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Smt. Yamini Khandelwal Asst. Commissioner Of Income 5, Amratolla Street Vs Tax, Circle-36, Kolkata Kolkata - 700001 Pan: Afupk6167K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri J.M. Thard, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Sr. D/R
Section 14A

…has taken into cognizance the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court and Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR), which are reproduced as under:- “5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Calcutta Vs Associated Industrial Development Company (P) Ltd (82 ITR 586), the Supreme Court observed that: "Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in- trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any dist…

JET AGE SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-III

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the

ITA/79/2010HC Calcutta15 Sept 2022

Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM,HON'BLE JUSTICE SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA

Section 260ASection 94(7)

…rores were shown as closing investment in shares and transactions were in respect of about 20 scripts which were blue chip scripts and if the net worth and the closing investment is considered 5 82 ITR 586 (SC) ITA NO. 79 OF 2010 Page 11 of 12 the investment of the assessee cannot be said to be voluminous or frequent. That apart, we have also noticed from the chart produced by assessee that the frequency of the transactions is very meagre and the volume of the transaction was within the net worth of the assessee company by utilising their…

M/S. CHANDAN INFRATECH LIMITED,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3),, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1597/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jul 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Milin Mehta, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT/D.R
Section 111ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2011-12 M/s. Chandan Infratech Income Tax Officer, Ltd. s-2, Navrang Ward-1(3), Building, Swastik Char Vs Ahmedabad Rasta, Navrangpura, (Respondent) Ahmedabad-380009 PAN No: AAACC8326Q (Appellant) Appellant by : Shri Milin Mehta, A.R. Respondent by : Shri A. P. Singh, CIT/D.R. Date of hearing : 20-06-2022 : 13-07-2022 Date of pronouncement आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- The present appeal has been filed by the Assess…

M/S.SHEETAL REAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

In the result, the appeal fails and the substantial questions of law

ITA/83/2010HC Orissa08 Feb 2022

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE R.K.PATTANAIK

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 260ASection 372A

…capital assets and a trading portfolio comprising of stock-in-trade which are to be treated as trading assets and consequently when the assessee has two portfolios, the assessee may have 161971 82 ITR 586 (SC) 17ITA No. 79 of 2010 ITA/83/2010 REPORTABLE Page 26 of 60 income under both the heads i.e. capital gains as well as business income. T…

MUJIB SALMANBHAI PATHAN,,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/NAG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Jun 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.98/Nag/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16 ......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Mujib Salmanbhai Pathan, House No.242, Ward No.2, Old Area, Wardha Road, Butibori, Nagpur-441108. Pan : Aefpp0269M. बनाम / V/S. The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ……""यथ" / Respondent Circle-3, Nagpur. Assessee By : Shri Veena Agrawal Revenue By : Smt. Agnes P. Thomas. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24.06.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 12.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Stating That The Subject, Whether Proper Approval Was Taken Before Converting Limited Scrutiny Into Complete Scrutiny Being Administrative Measure Cannot Be Taken Up. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Cit (A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Of Rs 1,00,85,013/- Made By The Ao As Income Under The Head Business & Profession Rightly Declared As Income Under The Head Capital Gains.

For Appellant: Shri Veena AgrawalFor Respondent: Smt. Agnes P. Thomas
Section 143(3)Section 54F

…ness’. [Para 14]” 11. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, it does not indicate that the purchase of land was made with the intention to re-sell. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd., 82 ITR 586 held as under :- “The High Court went beyond the matters which were the subject-matter of controversy before the departmental authorities and the Tribunal. It was never the case of the assessee at any stage that although it was a dealer in shares those shares which were the subject-matter of sale were held by way of investment. It had maintained t…

M/S UNICORN AGRO TECH LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD. vs. THE ASST. COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX, HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the

ITTA/48/2009HC Telangana16 Mar 2021

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 143(3)Section 260A

…the assessee as investment or stock-in-trade. In the said circular, the CBDT took note of the decision of the AAR and culled out 3 principles which were answered in the following terms:- 8 (1971) 82 ITR 586 (SC) ITA NO. 48 OF 2009 REPORTABLE Page 8 of 19 The Authority for Advance Rulings (AAR) (288 ITR 641), referring to the decisions of the Supreme Court in several cases, has culled out the fol…

PADMAVATHI DHAREPPA UPPAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 6(3)(1), BENGALURU

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands dismisses

ITA 1962/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2015 – 16

For Respondent: Shri Omprakash Jain, C.A
Section 143

…transaction. 5.3It is observed that these scripts have not been held by assessee even for substantial period of time which is alleged to be made for investment purposes. 5.4Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Associated Industrial Development Co. (P.) Ltd. [1971] 82 ITR 586, observed that: “Whether a particular holding of shares is by way of investment or forms part of the stock-in-trade is a matter which is within the knowledge of the assessee who holds the shares and it should, in normal circumstances, be in a position to produce evidence from its records as to whether it has maintained any distinction between tho…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIC ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…oper records are maintained as per report u/s 142(A) issued by the special auditor. • Certain Shares are held as investment to get tax exemption u/s. 10(38). 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co. Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC). 11.1 The main contentions of the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for…

SHRI. AMIT JAIN PROP M/S AMIT S FRAGRANCES,ERODE vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1, ERODE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1817/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1816 & 1817/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16 Shri Amit Jain, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Prop. M/S. Amit S. Fragrances, Income Tax, 37, Nms Compound, Circle-1, Erode – 638 001. Erode. [Pan: Afipj 5671F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri L.Shibi, C.S ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A.R.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.07.2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.09.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. Jayaraman: The Assessee Filed These Two Appeals Against The Common Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Coimbatore, In Ita No.444/16-17 & 90/17-18 Dated 01.03.2018 For The Assessment Years (Ays) 2014-15 & 2015-16, Respectively. Since, Common Issues Are Involved In These Appeals, They Are Heard Together & Being Disposed Together, For Convenience Sake.

For Appellant: Shri L.Shibi, C.SFor Respondent: Shri A.R.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 111A

…ted in a number of decisions. These include Raja Bahadur Visheshwar Singh v. CIT, (1961) 41 ITR 685 (SC); Commissioner of Income Tax, U.P v. Madan Gopal Radhey Lal, [1969] 73 ITR 652 (SC); Commissioner of Income Tax v Associated Industrial Development Company 82 ITR 586 (SC); P.M. Mohammed Meerakhan v. Commissioner of Income tax, Kerala, 73 ITR 735 (S.C.) and Commissioner of Income Tax v NSS ITA Nos.1816 & 1817/Chny/2018 :- 8 -: Investments Ltd 2007 (277) ITR 149 (Mad). It was in the light of these decisions that the CBDT Circular No. 4/2007, was issued, indicating the principles applicable in this regard. These…

Showing 1–20 of 98 · Page 1 of 5