Commissioner of Income Tax v. Electric Control Gear Manf. Co.

227 ITR 278Supreme Court of India1997#4476 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. Electric Control Gear Manf. Co. authority for?

Where the sale consideration for a slump sale is a lumpsum amount, and there is no evidence to indicate the price attributable to specific assets like plant, machinery, or buildings, the excess of the sale consideration over the written-down value of depreciable assets is not automatically taxable as deemed business profit under Section 41(2) merely because depreciation has been allowed.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2000 to 2023.

Also referred to as

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Electric Control Gear Manf. Co. · 227 ITR 278 · SC · 1997 · section 41(2) · slump sale · depreciable asset · written down value · sale consideration · deemed business profit

Issues it is cited on

section 2(42c)section 41(2)section 80ib(4)section 50bsection 43(6)section 38r&d expenditureopening wdvinitial assessment yearslump salegoing concerndeduction under section 80ia

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. Electric Control Gear Manf. Co.

M/S Titanor Components Ltd vs. CIT & Anr

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 190 / 2002HC Delhi22 Dec 2014
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260A

…e had himself furnished the information to the Assessing Officer and, therefore, it cannot be said that the price attributed to the items transferred was not indicated. In the same volume, the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Electric Control Gear Mfg. Co. (1997) 227 ITR 278, concluded otherwise in case, again of slump sale with a lump-sum consideration being paid for a going concern, on the ground that the assessee had not furnished the bifurcation or information in this regard. 14. This distinction was noticed by the Supreme Court in PNB Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 307 ITR 75 (SC). This was a case relating…

Titanor Components Ltd.) vs. CIT and Another

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/190/2002HC Delhi22 Dec 2014
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 260A

…e had himself furnished the information to the Assessing Officer and, therefore, it cannot be said that the price attributed to the items transferred was not indicated. In the same volume, the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Electric Control Gear Mfg. Co. (1997) 227 ITR 278, concluded otherwise in case, again of slump sale with a lump-sum consideration being paid for a going concern, on the ground that the assessee had not furnished the bifurcation or information in this regard. 14. This distinction was noticed by the Supreme Court in PNB Finance Ltd. vs. CIT (2008) 307 ITR 75 (SC). This was a case relating…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s. Spectra Shares AND Scrips Ltd

ITTA/574/2012HC Telangana17 Jul 2013

…herefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the same, as no point of law involved in this matter. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. ______________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 17.07.2013 ES [1] 227 ITR 278…

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)

…ITA Nos.417 of 2007 & 1069 of 2007 Page 1 of 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.417 of 2007 with ITA No.1069 of 2007 % DECISION DELIVERED ON: DECEMBER 24, 2010 1) ITA No.417 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax . . . Appellant through : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate. VERSUS ECE Industries Limited . . .Respondent through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocate. 2) ITA No.1069 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. ECE Industries Limited

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

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No.417 of 2007 with ITA No.1069 of 2007 % DECISION DELIVERED ON: DECEMBER 24, 2010 1) ITA No.417 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax . . . Appellant through : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Advocate. VERSUS ECE Industries Limited . . .Respondent through: Mr. Ajay Vohra, Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate and Mr. Somnath Shukla, Advocate. 2) ITA No.1069 of 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax . . . Appellant through : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal,…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. United Provinces Electric Supply Co

In the result, appeal is allowed

C.A. No.-006325-006325 - 1995Supreme Court17 Apr 2000
For Respondent: UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY COMPANY
Section 256(1)Section 32(1)Section 41(2)Section 6Section 7A

…ulated with respect of each individual asset. In support of his contention, he referred to the decision of this Court in C.I.T., Gujarat vs. Artex Manufacturing Co., http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 10 {(1997) 6 SCC 437 : 227 ITR 278}. In our view, in the present appeal, we are only concerned with the limited question which was referred to the High Court - whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on interpretation of the provisions of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910, the provisions of section 41(2) of the Act ar…