CIT v. JAI KRISHNA

231 ITR 108High Court1998#13833 most cited
7

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Judgments citing CIT v. JAI KRISHNA

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX 4 BENGALURU 2 vs. M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED

SLP(C) No.-000063-000063 - 2025Supreme Court02 Jan 2025

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

Section 2(47)

…2025 INSC 38 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NO. 63 OF 2025 (Arising out of Diary No. 39934 of 2024) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 & ANR. ....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS M/S. JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD. ....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R 1. Delay condoned. 2. This petition is at the instance of the Revenue, seeking leave to appeal against the judgement and order dated 20.02.2023 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengalur…

DCIT, CIRCLE-II(I) vs. I.F.C.I. LTD.,,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2205/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

…ailure to deposit call money resulted into short term capital loss. The court allowed a claim of capital loss even in absence of consideration and the transaction was treated as transfer. b. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Jayakrishna Harivallah Das 231 ITR 108 observed that full value of consideration could be nil. The court observed as follows: “There is, therefore, no reasons why a shareholder who in distribution of assets has, even if, not received any deemed consideration in satisfaction of his rights and interests in the holding and has thereby suffered a total loss, cannot claim the benefit of s…

IFCI LTD. vs. ADDL. CIT, CIRCLE-11(1),,

In the result ITA number 2205/Del/2005 filed by the learned assessing officer is dismissed

ITA 2120/DEL/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 2001-2002

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 139Section 142Section 143

…ailure to deposit call money resulted into short term capital loss. The court allowed a claim of capital loss even in absence of consideration and the transaction was treated as transfer. b. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Jayakrishna Harivallah Das 231 ITR 108 observed that full value of consideration could be nil. The court observed as follows: “There is, therefore, no reasons why a shareholder who in distribution of assets has, even if, not received any deemed consideration in satisfaction of his rights and interests in the holding and has thereby suffered a total loss, cannot claim the benefit of s…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.ABB LTD

In the result, both the substantial questions

ITA/134/2011HC Karnataka09 Jun 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 46(2)

…d the assessee was entitled to write off an amount of Rs.3,50,81,381/- as bad debt. It was also held that the aforesaid amount should be treated as capital loss under Section 46(2) of the Act in view of the decision in the case of ‘CIT VS. JAI KRISHNA’, 231 ITR 108 (GUJ). Being aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue while inviting our attention to the order of assessment has pointed out that the assessing officer has not adhered to the manner of requirement of writing off the bad debt. It is also urged that tribunal has also failed to examine whether writ…

ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI vs. ZOOM ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the assessee on this issue stands allowed

ITA 3385/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Amarjit Singh (Jm)

Section 194CSection 194JSection 40Section 4OSection 9

…ced by Rs. Rs. 22,500/- received from ZEN amounting to Rs. 2,26,25,509/- is allowable as short term capital loss in his computation of income for A.Y. 2011-12. In this regard learned counsel placed reliance upon the case of CIT Vs. Jaykrishana Harivallabhdas (231 ITR 108). He further submitted that decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. R.M. Amin (106 ITR 368) is not applicable. He further submitted that decision relied upon by learned Departmental Representative of ITAT Special Bench, Mumbai in the case of Bennett and Coleman & Co. Ltd. (133 ITD 1) is not applicable. 31. We have heard both the co…

M/S JUPITER CAPITAL PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(5), BANGALORE

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

ITA 445/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. Parthasarathi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D. Sudhakara Rao, CIT (DR)
Section 2(47)

…deposit call money resulted into short term capital loss. The court allowed a claim of Capital loss even in absence of Consideration. The transaction is treated as a transfer. The Gujarat High Court decision in case of CIT Jayakrishana Harivallahh das (1998) 231 ITR 108 (Guj) observed that full value of consideration could be nil. The Mumbai High Court in case of CIT v Surat Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Pvt. Ltd Concurred with the proposition that full value of consideration could be nil. It is relevant to quote the observations of Gujarat High Court decision in case of CIT v Jayakrishna Harivallabha das in t…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

In the result, both the substantial questions

ITTA/134/2011HC Telangana20 Apr 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 46(2)

…d the assessee was entitled to write off an amount of Rs.3,50,81,381/- as bad debt. It was also held that the aforesaid amount should be treated as capital loss under Section 46(2) of the Act in view of the decision in the case of ‘CIT VS. JAI KRISHNA’, 231 ITR 108 (GUJ). Being aggrieved, the revenue is in appeal before us. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue while inviting our attention to the order of assessment has pointed out that the assessing officer has not adhered to the manner of requirement of writing off the bad debt. It is also urged that tribunal has also failed to examine whether writ…

CIT v. JAI KRISHNA (231 ITR 108) — Cited in 7 Judgments | BharatTax