CIT v. B.M. Kharwar

AGS DEVELOPERS PVT LTD ,JASOLA DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (4), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Ags Developers Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, H.No.47, Pocket Ii, Ward -1(4), Near Appollo Hospital, Jasola, New Delhi. New Delhi-110076. Pan-Aafca1795G Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Sandeep Goel, Adv. Respondent By Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.10.2024

…ness, creditworthiness, identity are deeper and obtrusive. Hon’ble SC Panipat Wollen and General Mills [1976] 103 ITR 66, 74 Hon’ble SC Gosalia Shipping P Ltd [1978] 113 ITR 307, 311 Hon’ble SC Aloke Mitra [1980] 126 ITR, 599, 611 Hon’ble SC MB Kharwar [1969] 72 ITR 603 Hon’ble Kolha Hirdagarh Co. Ltd [1949] 17 ITR 545, 555 Bombay HC Hon’ble SC Juggilal Kamlapat [1969] 73 ITR 702 Hon’ble SC McDowell & Co [1985] 154 TTR 148 Hon’ble SC CIT Vs Durga Prasad More [1971] 082 ITR 0540 SC Hon’ble SC CIT Vs Sumati Dayal [1995] 214 ITR 80 Hon’ble Pr. CIT-6, New Delhi Vs A case involving make-believe paper work to Jurisdict…

CRM SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

…at in the absence of a suggestion of any bad faith or fraud, the liability to tax depends upon the meaning and content of the language of the document embodying the transaction: - CIT v. Motor & General Stores (P) Ltd.: 66 ITR 692 (SC) - CIT v. B.M. Kharwar: 72 ITR 603 (SC) 16. Ld. Sr. Counsel, has submitted that section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides for alteration in the original contract upon consent of the parties to the contract, meaning thereby, that as such, alteration in a contract is not prohibited under the law. He thus contended that as the payment of royalty on the aggregate revenues o…

CRM SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-4(2), NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are allowed with consequential effect

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

…at in the absence of a suggestion of any bad faith or fraud, the liability to tax depends upon the meaning and content of the language of the document embodying the transaction: - CIT v. Motor & General Stores (P) Ltd.: 66 ITR 692 (SC) - CIT v. B.M. Kharwar: 72 ITR 603 (SC) 16. Ld. Sr. Counsel, has submitted that section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides for alteration in the original contract upon consent of the parties to the contract, meaning thereby, that as such, alteration in a contract is not prohibited under the law. He thus contended that as the payment of royalty on the aggregate revenues o…

DABUR INVEST CORP,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, RANGE-46, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Partially Through Video Conferencing) Dabur Invest Corp, The Joint Commissioner Of Vs. 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax , Rouse Avenue, New Delhi Range-46, Pan: Aaadfd2529G New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…entirely dissent from such a doctrine." 3.11 The principle enunciated by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Motors & General Stores (supra) later on has been endorsed by a larger Bench of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.M. Kharwar in 72 ITR 603. In order to understand the principle as laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Motors & General Stores, it is all the more necessary to look into the facts of that very case. In the case of Motors & General Stores,on 9th September 1955, the board of directors of Motors & General Stores authorized its managing director to negotiate…

MR. KRISHNA KUMAR PANT,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

…2, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 any potential future advantage. The observation in the above case that regard must be had to the substance of transaction rather than to its mere form was later disapproved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. B.M. Kharwar [1969] 72 ITR 603. But, the basic principle declared in Smt. Kikabhai Premchand’s case (supra) that there could not be any levy of tax on a future income, still holds good. The Court of appeal in Mason (Inspector of Taxes) v. Innes [1968] 70 ITR 491 has pronounced the same basic, elementary principle of Income-tax Law that a man could not be taxed on profit that he…

MR. SANJIV NARAYAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

…2, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 any potential future advantage. The observation in the above case that regard must be had to the substance of transaction rather than to its mere form was later disapproved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. B.M. Kharwar [1969] 72 ITR 603. But, the basic principle declared in Smt. Kikabhai Premchand’s case (supra) that there could not be any levy of tax on a future income, still holds good. The Court of appeal in Mason (Inspector of Taxes) v. Innes [1968] 70 ITR 491 has pronounced the same basic, elementary principle of Income-tax Law that a man could not be taxed on profit that he…

MR. RANJEET SINGH,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

…2, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 any potential future advantage. The observation in the above case that regard must be had to the substance of transaction rather than to its mere form was later disapproved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. B.M. Kharwar [1969] 72 ITR 603. But, the basic principle declared in Smt. Kikabhai Premchand’s case (supra) that there could not be any levy of tax on a future income, still holds good. The Court of appeal in Mason (Inspector of Taxes) v. Innes [1968] 70 ITR 491 has pronounced the same basic, elementary principle of Income-tax Law that a man could not be taxed on profit that he…

MR. J.S. GUJRAL,GURGAON vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year 2005-06

…2, 5513, 5546 & 5574/DEL/2011 any potential future advantage. The observation in the above case that regard must be had to the substance of transaction rather than to its mere form was later disapproved by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CIT v. B.M. Kharwar [1969] 72 ITR 603. But, the basic principle declared in Smt. Kikabhai Premchand’s case (supra) that there could not be any levy of tax on a future income, still holds good. The Court of appeal in Mason (Inspector of Taxes) v. Innes [1968] 70 ITR 491 has pronounced the same basic, elementary principle of Income-tax Law that a man could not be taxed on profit that he…

BETTER OPTION ESTATES PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Chary

…manlal 197 ITR 123 and also CIT vs. Ramgopal to 90 Taxman 205 (Delhi), CIT vs. Laxmi Devi to 96 ITR 363 (MP). 11 20. Further, by placing reliance on the edition reported in CIT vs. Motor And General Stores Private Limited 66 ITR 692 (SC) and CIT vs. BM Khanna 72 ITR 603, Ld. AR submitted that when the transactions are embodied in a document, the liability to tax depends upon the meaning and context used in accordance with the ordinary rules of construction and the taxing statute has to be applied in accordance with the legal rights of the parties to the transactions and not on “substance of the matter” unless the…