CIT v. Bikaner Trading Co. Ltd.

RINA S. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CC-4(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue\nis dismissed

…the matter which needs to be considered is that the\nburden of proving that amount year of an was taxable because it was received\nin the account lies upon the department. This proposition has been reiterated\nin CIT V/s. Bikaner Trading Co.Ltd., reported in 78 ITR 12. Income of the\nassessee has to be received by the assessee an income tax is levied on income.\nFor this purpose we may refer judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. M/s.\n144 Shoorji Vallabhadas & Co. reported in 46 ITR which was reiterated in\nGodhra Electricity Co. Ltd., V/s. CIT reported in 225 ITR 746. Supreme Court\nsummed up the law as und…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(1), MUMBAI vs. SMT REENA SUDHIR MEHTA , MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

…of the matter which needs to be considered is that the burden of proving that amount year of an was taxable because it was received in the account lies upon the department. This proposition has been reiterated in CIT V/s. Bikaner Trading Co.Ltd., reported in 78 ITR 12. Income of the assessee has to be received by the assessee an income tax is levied on income. For this purpose we may refer judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT V/s. M/s. 144 Shoorji Vallabhadas & Co. reported in 46 ITR which was reiterated in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd., V/s. CIT reported in 225 ITR 746. Supreme Court summed up the law as under: “…

GROWMORE LEASING & INVESTMENT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT-31, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

…he matter which needs to be considered is that the burden of proving that an amount was taxable because it was received in the year of account lies upon the Department. This proposition has been reiterated in CIT v. Bikaner Trading Co. Ltd. reported in [1970] 78 ITR 12 (SC). Income of the assessee has to be received by the assessee as income-tax is levied on income. For this purpose, we may refer the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. reported in [1962] 46 ITR 144 which was reiterated in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC). The Supreme Court summe…

GROWMORE LEASING AND INVESTMENTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC-4(1) (ERSTWHILE DCIT-31, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

…he matter which needs to be considered is that the burden of proving that an amount was taxable because it was received in the year of account lies upon the Department. This proposition has been reiterated in CIT v. Bikaner Trading Co. Ltd. reported in [1970] 78 ITR 12 (SC). Income of the assessee has to be received by the assessee as income-tax is levied on income. For this purpose, we may refer the judgment of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co. reported in [1962] 46 ITR 144 which was reiterated in Godhra Electricity Co. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [1997] 225 ITR 746 (SC). The Supreme Court summe…