CIT v. Narkeshari Prakashan Ltd.

196 ITR 438High Court1992#23364 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,356 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2016.

Judgments citing CIT v. Narkeshari Prakashan Ltd.

M/S Hindustan Engineering & Industries Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.D.I.T Range - 5, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 330/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Jhajharia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50BSection 5O

…ess and the transaction is a slump sale. The assessee has simply assigned sale values to the itemized assets to come out the slump sale and to avoid the payment of taxes. 38. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Narkeshari Prakashan Ltd. [1992] 196 ITR 438 has laid down certain tests to decide whether the transaction is a slump sale and held that the branch of the assessee had goodwill and, therefore, when the branch is transferred as a whole for a given price, it constituted a slump sale. Therefore, one of the tests applied by the Bombay High Court was transfer of a running business. The second te…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ece Industries Ltd

ITA/417/2007HC Delhi24 Dec 2010

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.SIKRI,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

Section 50Section 50(2)

…. Union of India [AIR 1970 SC 564]; (2) Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [264 ITR 193 (Bom)]; (3) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Max India Ltd. [319 ITR 68 (P & H)] (4) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Narkeshwari Prakashan Ltd. [196 ITR 438 (Bom.)] 14. We have given our due consideration to the aforesaid submissions made by counsel for the parties on either side. Before we embark on the discussion on the issue that qua for consideration and deal with our comments, we deed it proper to take note of the relevant statutory provisions. Chapter IV which deals with „Computation…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ECE Industries Limited

ITA-417/2007HC Delhi24 Dec 2010
Section 50Section 50(2)

…. Union of India [AIR 1970 SC 564]; (2) Premier Automobiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [264 ITR 193 (Bom)]; (3) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Max India Ltd. [319 ITR 68 (P & H)] (4) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Narkeshwari Prakashan Ltd. [196 ITR 438 (Bom.)] 14. We have given our due consideration to the aforesaid submissions made by counsel for the parties on either side. Before we embark on the discussion on the issue that qua for consideration and deal with our comments, we deed it proper to take note of the relevant 2010:DHC:6300-DB Total Income‟ starts with Section 14 which de…

CIT v. Narkeshari Prakashan Ltd. (196 ITR 438) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax