Karampura Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT

12 ITR 50High Court#16546 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2023.

Judgments citing Karampura Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Circle- 26(2), Delhi vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7103/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Sr. DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)

…held as investment to get tax exemption u/s. 10(38) . 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co . Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC) . 11.1 The main contentions o f the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for controlling interest for over two decades . This position was accepted by the Department up to A.Y . 20…

ACIT, Central Circle, Panaji vs. M/S Sociadade De Fomento Industrial P. Ltd, Margao

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 116/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ed on the above Supreme Court decision. (ii) Since dealing in shares is authorized by Articles of Association of company, income earned from share transactions to be assessed as business income. This was so held in the case of Paimia Cement Ltd..vs. CIT (Pat) 12 ITR 50. (iii) Purchase and sale of shares in a Private company within a short period is adventure in the nature of trade even if such shares are shown as investments in the books of accounts. This was so held in the case of V. Amiratham Ammal vs. CIT (Mad) 7,4 ITR 739 and Burnside Investment & Holdings Ltd., Vs. CIT (ITAT, Mad),61 ITD 501. (iv) There is…

Socieadade De Fomento Indl. Pvt. Ltd., Margao vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Margao Range, Margao

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 105/PAN/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Sh. Nishant Thakkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Ranjan Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1893/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. N. K. Choudharydr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 1893/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Assistant Commissioner Of Vs M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, 10, Income Tax, Circle-26(1), New Delhi-110002 Rouse Avenue, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacv0132B Assessee By : Sh. M. P. Rastogi, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. H. K. Choudhary, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 06.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 07.02.2020

For Appellant: Sh. M. P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR

Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…held as investment to get tax exemption u/s. 10(38). 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co. Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC). 11.1 The main contentions of the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for controlling interest for over two decades. This position was accepted by the Department up to A.Y. 2005…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2863/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Dec 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2006-07 Deputy Cit, Vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Circle-17(1), New Delhi. 10-Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacv0132B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Asstt. Cit, Vs. Vic Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., 4Th Floor, Punjabi Bhawan, Circle-17(1), New Delhi. 10-Rouse Avenue, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacv0132B) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri MP Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Chandra Sharma, CIT- DR

Section 111ASection 143(3)Section 14A

…eld as investment to get tax exemption u/s. 10(38). 10.2 The AO relied on the following case laws: , . • CIT vs. Associated Industrial Development Co. Ltd. 82 ITR 586 (Se) • Karampura Development Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 44 ITR 362 (Se) • Dalmiya cements Ltd. vs. CIT 12 ITR 50 (Patna) • CIT vs. British Paints 188 ITR 44, 49 (SC). 11.1 The main contentions of the AR as gathered from the various submissions made are as under: • Shares of Dabur India Ltd. have been held as investment is by the assessee as a promoter for controlling interest for over two decades. This position was accepted by the Department up to A.Y. 2005-0…