CIT v. R.L. Kasliwal M9941

207 ITR 208Reported decision#19915 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2024.

Also reported as

120 CTR 5677 Taxmann 58

Judgments citing CIT v. R.L. Kasliwal M9941

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. PRAKASH NIMMAGADDA, HYDERABAD, SECUNDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)
Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…ess/ professional income derived from these activities of management of companies and liable to be assessed u/s 28(iv) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The learned DR has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. R.L. Kasliwal (207 ITR 208) as well as decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Priyanka Chopra vs. Dy. CIT (169 ITD 1). The learned DR has submitted that there is a nexus between the business activity of the assessee and allotment of shares at a face value which resulted a non-monetary benefit to the assessee in comparison to the fair market value of th…

M/S. SIMPSON UNITECH WIRELESS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1953/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agrawal, Adv. ShriFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana CIT-DR
Section 28Section 3

…CTR 200 (Madras), where Hon'ble Madras High Court held that amount representing principal loan waived by bank under one time settlement scheme would constitute income falling under section 28(iv). ii. CIT Vs R.L. Kasliwal M9941 77 Taxman 58 (Rajasthan)/H9941 207 ITR 208 (Ra|asthan)/[19941 120 CTR 56 (Rajasthan) where Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held as follows: Assessee was a partner of a firm A part of premises taken by firm on lease was given to assessee-partner free of rent. Assessee offered Rs. 4,000 to be assessed in his hands on this account. ITO included benefit in hands of assessee at Rs. 9,000. AAC del…

M/S. ACORUS UNITECH WIRELESS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2989/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agrawal, Adv. ShriFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana CIT-DR
Section 28Section 3

…CTR 200 (Madras), where Hon'ble Madras High Court held that amount representing principal loan waived by bank under one time settlement scheme would constitute income falling under section 28(iv). ii. CIT Vs R.L. Kasliwal M9941 77 Taxman 58 (Rajasthan)/H9941 207 ITR 208 (Ra|asthan)/[19941 120 CTR 56 (Rajasthan) where Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held as follows: Assessee was a partner of a firm A part of premises taken by firm on lease was given to assessee-partner free of rent. Assessee offered Rs. 4,000 to be assessed in his hands on this account. ITO included benefit in hands of assessee at Rs. 9,000. AAC del…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ACORUS WIRELESS UNITECH PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2075/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agrawal, Adv. ShriFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana CIT-DR
Section 28Section 3

…CTR 200 (Madras), where Hon'ble Madras High Court held that amount representing principal loan waived by bank under one time settlement scheme would constitute income falling under section 28(iv). ii. CIT Vs R.L. Kasliwal M9941 77 Taxman 58 (Rajasthan)/H9941 207 ITR 208 (Ra|asthan)/[19941 120 CTR 56 (Rajasthan) where Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court held as follows: Assessee was a partner of a firm A part of premises taken by firm on lease was given to assessee-partner free of rent. Assessee offered Rs. 4,000 to be assessed in his hands on this account. ITO included benefit in hands of assessee at Rs. 9,000. AAC del…

CIT v. R.L. Kasliwal M9941 (207 ITR 208) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax