CIT v. L.G. Ramamurthi

110 ITR 543High Court1977#12057 most cited
8

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

Issues it is cited on

section 198section 256(1)section 2(31)section 256section 38annual letting valueannual valuestrategic investmentsection 115jb(2)section 40a(2)(b)section 40a(2)block of assets

Judgments citing CIT v. L.G. Ramamurthi

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1) , MUMBAI vs. RAYMOND LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4082/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…the Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year 2008-0…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1) , MUMBAI vs. RAYMOND LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4073/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…the Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year 2008-0…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1) , MUMBAI vs. RAYMOND LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4072/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…the Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year 2008-0…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-8(1) , MUMBAI vs. RAYMOND LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 202/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri T. Shankar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 40A(2)(b)

…the Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year 2008-0…

SILVER SPARK APPAREL LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT, CC-8(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 558/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. Madhur Agrawal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chetan M. Kacha, Sr. DR
Section 30Section 31Section 32Section 38(2)

…the Companies Act, there could not be any non-business purpose insofar as the assessee- company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT v/s L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year 2008-…

NIBR BULLION P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5524/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year…

NIBR BULLION P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5523/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year…

NIBR BULLION P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CC 3, MUMBAI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5522/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Companies Act, there could not be any 'non-business' purpose insofar as the assessee-company was concerned. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, Hon'ble High Court followed the decision from Hon'ble Madras High Court in CIT vs L.G. Ramamurthi (1977) 110 ITR 543 (Mad.). No contrary decisions or facts were brought to our notice by the Revenue. Thus, respectfully following the aforesaid decision from Hon'ble High Court, these grounds of the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid conclusion/order will also cover identical grounds for the Assessment Year 2007-08 (ITA No.5523/Mum/2011) and Assessment Year…

CIT v. L.G. Ramamurthi (110 ITR 543) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax