Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. v. CIT

229 ITR 112Supreme Court of India1998#10628 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 45 Section 48 Section 49(4)Section 54F Section 56(2)(vii)(c)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 56(2)(vii)(c)section 56(2)(viia)section 56(2)(vii)section 56(2)fair market value section 56 income from other sources transfer company section 143(3)business interest

Judgments citing Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 05 , DELHI vs. DEEPAK KOTHARI , KANPUR

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

ITA 1834/DEL/2021[20017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 49(4)Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Deepak Kothari, vs. ACIT, Central Circle – 5, 24/19, The Mall Kanpur, New Delhi. Kanpur – 208 011 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAYPK6101C) ACIT, Central Circle – 5, vs. Deepak Kothari, New Delhi. 24/19, The Mall Kanpur, Kanpur – 208 011 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AAYPK6101C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Agarwal, Advocate Shri Deepesh Garg, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 05.06.2025…

DEEPAK KATHARI,KANPUR vs. ACIT, CC-5, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1205/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 49(4)Section 56(2)(vii)

DCIT CENTRALCIRCLE-2(3), CHENNAI vs. M/S TANGI FCILITY SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 735/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.735/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit M/S. Tangi Facility Solutions Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Central Circle-2(3) Old No.42, New No.2, Chennai-34. Luz Avenue, Mylapore, Vs. Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafct-1408-B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mrs. Swapna Nanu Ambath (Cit)- Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Shivakumar (Advocate)-Ld. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18-03-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-06-2024

For Appellant: Mrs. Swapna Nanu Ambath (CIT)- Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri G. Shivakumar (Advocate)-Ld. AR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(b)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viia)

…individual share cost shall reduce in accounting parlance but overall cost shall remain the same. The assessee referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd. (52 ITR 567) as well as in Hansur Plywood Works Ltd. vs CIT (229 ITR 112) holding that bonus shares do not amount to distribution of accumulated profit of the company. It was further submitted that the bonus was not from profit but out of securities premium account which could not be used for paying dividend. 2.2 However, Ld. AO, considering the provisions of Sec. 2(22)(b) held that bonus was to be considered as divid…

JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE-10, NEW DELHI vs. BHANU CHOPRA, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue Department stands dismissed

ITA 167/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryjt. Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sh. Bhanu Chopra, Tax,Special Range-10, M-140, Greater Kailash-Ii, New Delhi Delhi Pan: Agwpc5625R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ShriIshtiyaqueAdhmed, Ld. CITFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Sharma, Ld. Adv

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(xv)Section 250(6)Section 49(4)Section 55Section 55(2)(a)Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…de to the decision in CIT vs. Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd [1964] 52 ITR 567 (SC) as well as in Khoday Distilleries Ltd (supra), wherein reference stands made to the former, also quoting there- from, besides inter alia to Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 112 (SC), where the same were referred to as 'capitalization shares'. In other words, there is no receipt of any property by the shareholder, and what stands received by CIT (A) - 10, New Delh Sh. Bhanu Chopra (AY2015-16) him is the split shares out of his own holding. It would be akin to somebody exchanging a one thousand rupee note for two five hun…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- vs. DR. RANJAN PAI

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/501/2016HC Karnataka15 Dec 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 260Section 260ASection 56(2)(v)Section 56(2)(vii)

…SIONEROF INCOME TAX', 307 ITR 312 (SC), 'THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF REVENUE, SEPARATE REVENUE, MADRAS, REFERRING OFFICER VS. MADURA MILLS COMPANY LTD.', ILR 1937 MAD 559, 'HUNSUR PLYWOOD WORKS LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX', (1998) 229 ITR 112 (SC), 'WOOD CRAFT PRODUCTS LTD. VS. COMMISSIONEROF INCOME-TAX', (1993) 204 ITR 545 (CALCUTTA), 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS VS. ATHI V. RAMACHANDRA CHETTIAR', 52 ITR 96,'K.P.VARGHESE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER', 9 (1981) 131 ITR 597 (SC) as well as CIRCULAR NO.6/2014, CIRCULAR NO.05/2005 DATED 15.07.3005, CIRCULAR NO.1/2011…

DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. SMT. MAMTA BHANDARI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1716/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 132Section 153ASection 56Section 56(2)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘D’, NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 DCIT, Vs. Smt. Mamta Bhandari, Central Circle-1, 1/2873, Ram Nagar, Faridabad Loni Road, Shahdra, Delhi PAN :AAGPB3440H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Smt. Deepali Chandra, Sr.DR Respondent by Shri R.S. Ahuja, CA Date of hearing 26.11.2019 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2019 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, AM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against order dated 29/01/2016, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon…

DCIT, FARIDABAD vs. SMT. MAMTA BHANDARI,, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue dismissed

ITA 5681/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Ahuja, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Shivam, CIT-D.R

Section 132Section 153ASection 56(2)(vii)

…ay be to the decision in CIT vs Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd. [1964] 52 ITR 567 (SC) as well as in Khoday Distilleries Ltd. (Supra), wherein reference stands made to the former, also quoting there from besides inter alia to Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd vs CIT[ 1998] 229 ITR 112 (SC), where the 10 ITA.No.5681/Del./2016 Smt. Mamta Bhandari, Delhi. same were referred to as ‘capitalization shares’. (v) In other words, there is no receipt of any property by the shareholder, and what stands received by him is the split shares out of his own holding. It would be akin to somebody exchanging a one thousand rupee note for two f…

ITO 1(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. CORAL COSMETICS LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6011/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Aug 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6011/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :20102011) Ito1(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S Coral Cosmetics Ltd., Cambatta Bldg., 42, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacc 2037 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Ms. Bharti Singh "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 03/08/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 12/08/2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma (A.M): This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, For The Assessment Year 20102011, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Revenue : 1. "Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Entertaining, Adjudicating & Passing Order On The Charge Of Dividend Distribution Tax U/S 1150 Of The Act, When Such Charging Of Dividend Distribution Tax Is Not An Appealable Order Uls 246A Of The Act?; 2. Without Prejudice To The Ground Of Appeal No. 1 Above, Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Holding That The Issue Of Bonus Shares Does Not Entail Release Of Assets Of The Company To Attract Provisions Of Sec. 2(22)(A) Of The Act Requiring Dividend Distribution Tax To Be Paid By The Assessee?" 3. "Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Was Justified In Deleting The Addition On Account Of Cessation Of Liability U/S 41(1) Of The Act When The To An End By The Hon'Ble Court Holding The Appeal By The Assessee A Defective Appeal?"

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Bharti Singh

Section 115Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(a)Section 205(3)Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ ‘सी’, मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.6011/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :20102011) ITO1(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. M/s Coral Cosmetics Ltd., Cambatta Bldg., 42, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai400020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACC 2037 Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by :Ms. Bharti Singh "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 03/08/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement 12/0…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. DR. RAJAN PAI, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 1290/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. George George Ki.T.A No.1290/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Central Circle -2(2), Bengaluru .. Appellant V. Dr. Rajan Pai, Block No.1B, Jakkur Plantation Village, Yelahanka Main Road, Bengaluru .. Respondent Pan : Agbpp2795G Assessee By : Shri. Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sanjay Kumar, Cit -Iii Heard On : 12.04.2016 Pronounced On : 29.04.2016 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sanjay Kumar, CIT -III

Section 115RSection 115R(2)Section 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)

…e to the decision in CIT vs. Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd. [1964] 52 ITR 567 (SC) as well as in Khoday Distilleries Ltd. (supra), wherein reference stands made to the former, also quoting there-from, besides inter alia to Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. vs. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 112 (SC), where the same were referred to as ‘capitalization shares’. In other words, there is no receipt of any property by the shareholder, and what stands received by him is the split shares out of his own holding. It would be akin to somebody exchanging a one thousand rupee note for two five hundred or ten hundred rupee notes. There is, according…

M/S KHODAY DISTILLERIES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

C.A. No.-006654-006654 - 2008Supreme Court14 Nov 2008

Section 2Section 4(1)Section 4(1)(a)

…hares from the company. 14. Our aforesaid view, namely, that bonus shares go by the modern name of “capitalization shares” finds support in the judgment of this Court in the case of Hunsur Plywood Works Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income- tax reported in (1998) 229 ITR 112. The relevant portion of which reads as under: “…The issuance of bonus shares was nothing but mere capitalisation of the profits of the Company in respect of which certificates are issued to the shareholders entitling them to participate in the amount of the reserve but only as part of the capital. The mechanism and effect of issuance of bon…