What is McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO authority for?

The Supreme Court held that while legitimate tax planning is permissible, transactions structured as a "colourable device" or "subterfuge" solely to avoid tax are impermissible. It mandates a judicial shift to look beyond the form to the substance of a transaction, allowing the lifting of the corporate veil in tax evasion arrangements.

How many judgments cite McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO?

741 judgments on BharatTax cite McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO (154 ITR 148), spanning 2008 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 148, Section 147, Section 68, Section 69C, Section 133A.

McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO (154 ITR 148)

ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

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

ITA 1949/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-14, New Delhi

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

ITA 1026/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 884/DEL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 883/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 9618/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 9617/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 9616/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 9615/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind K. Bansal, Sr. DR

Section 142(3)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI Before Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member Sh. Yogesh Kumar US, Judicial Member ITA No. 9615/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 9616/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2011-12 ITA No. 9617/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 ITA No. 9618/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 1026/Del/2021 : Asstt. Year: 2017-18 Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ACIT, 1170, Kucha Nahajani, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle-6, New Delhi-110006 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACN7129G ITA No. 883/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2010-11 ITA No. 884/Del/2020 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14…

Jm Financial Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3987/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)

…of the said provision of the Act. That such use cannot be called "abuse of law". Even assuming that the transaction was pre-planned there is nothing to" impeach the genuineness of the transaction. With regard to the ruling in McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), it may be stated that in the later decision of this Court in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 it has been held that a citizen is free to carry on its business within the four corners of the law. That, mere tax planning, without any motive to evade taxes through colourable devices is not frowned upon even by the judg…

DCIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. J.M. Financial Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3925/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(3)

…of the said provision of the Act. That such use cannot be called "abuse of law". Even assuming that the transaction was pre-planned there is nothing to" impeach the genuineness of the transaction. With regard to the ruling in McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC), it may be stated that in the later decision of this Court in Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 it has been held that a citizen is free to carry on its business within the four corners of the law. That, mere tax planning, without any motive to evade taxes through colourable devices is not frowned upon even by the judg…

Dristi Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), Ghaziabad

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 912/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 145Section 68

…ion in confirming the addition made by the AO being undisclosed income claimed by the appellant as trading profit u/s 68. The AO has rightly placed reliance on Sumati Dayal Vs. CIT (1995) 214 ITR 801 (SC), Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (SC), McDowel & Co. Ltd. 154 ITR 148 (SC), CIT vs. RS Sibbal 269 ITR 429, Delhi, Sajan Das and Sons vs. CIT 264 ITR 435, Delhi, DC Rastogi vs. ACIT 57 ITD 295, Delhi. What needs to be considered is whether the transaction is a device to avoid tax and whether the transaction is such that judicial process may accord its approval to it. It has been held that judicial process can remove…

DCIT-CC 5(2), Mumbai vs. Jetair Private Limited, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 3050/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Section 131Section 133ASection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘F‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT-CC 5(2) Vs. M/s. Jetair Private Mumbai Limited Jetair House 13 Community Centre Yusuf Sarai Delhi – 100 049 PAN/GIR No.AAACJ0121C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) CO No.23/Mum/2023 (Arising out of ITA No.3050/Mum/2022) (Assessment Year :2018-19) M/s. Jetair Private Vs. DCIT-CC 5(2) Limited Mumbai Jetair House 13 Community Centre Yusuf Sarai Delhi – 100 049 PAN/GIR No.AAACJ0121C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Manan Mathuria Revenue by Shri Suresh D Gaikwad Date of…

Sanjeevkumar Manchand Rajput, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 613/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Ms. Abhilasha Pawar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 270A

…assessee is habitual for claiming fraudulently refund by increasing deduction and reducing his taxable income since A.Y. 2016-17 onwards. Reference may be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mc Dowell & Company Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that “Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is within the framework of law, Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning….”. In the case of DCIT v. Pawan Kumar Malhotra [2010] 2 ITR 250 (Del – Trib.), it was observed that AO had come to a conclusion after meticulous enquiry as regards the…

Sanjeevkumar Manchand Rajput, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 612/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Ms. Abhilasha Pawar, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148Section 270A

…assessee is habitual for claiming fraudulently refund by increasing deduction and reducing his taxable income since A.Y. 2016-17 onwards. Reference may be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mc Dowell & Company Ltd. v. CTO [1985] 154 ITR 148 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that “Tax planning may be legitimate provided it is within the framework of law, Colourable devices cannot be part of tax planning….”. In the case of DCIT v. Pawan Kumar Malhotra [2010] 2 ITR 250 (Del – Trib.), it was observed that AO had come to a conclusion after meticulous enquiry as regards the…

Raigarh Jute & Textile Mills Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-8(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2286/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.2286/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Raigarh Jute & Textile Mills Ltd...................................................……Appellant 36, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata-700071. [Pan: Aabcr2034B] Vs. Acit, Circle-8(2), Kolkata...............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhewala, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 16, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यकसद"य"वारा/ Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.03.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A)- 15 Erred In Holding That The Assessing Officer Was Justified In Disallowing & Adding Back The Appellant'S Claim For Deduction Of Loss Suffered Of Rs.4,02,00,360/- Suffered By The Appellant In Its Share Trading Business. 2 That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A)-15 Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Assessing Officer Of Invoking The

Section 14ASection 250

…ayment to tax or to obtain any advantage or benefit for tax purpose by dubious method. The principle on the matter of tax evasion and tax avoidance as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in a landmark judgment in the case of McDowell and Co. Ltd. v. CTO (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC). The judgment is applicable where devices though seemingly legal are adopted in collusion or whether devices adopted are not genuine or bona fide but are sham, make believe or camouflaged to escape the liability for the tax or to obtain certain benefit for tax purpose.” The Assessing Officer thereafter referred to certain case laws and held…

DCIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi vs. Avantha Realty Ltd (Previous Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee as well as of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1333/DEL/2022[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2004-05 The Dcit, Central Circle-20, Delhi Avantha Realty Ltd., (Previous Known As Janpath Vs. Investment & Holding Ltd.) 124, Thapar House, Janpath, Central Delhi 110001 Pan Aaacj 8030 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2004-05 Avantha Realty Ltd., The Dcit, Central Circle-20, Delhi (Previous Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd.) Vs. 124, Thapar House, Janpath, Central Delhi 110001 Pan Aaacj 8030 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv

…, disallowed. Thus, this transaction, entered into and executed through an agreement signed over a non judicial stamp paper of Rs.50/- only is treated as sham. Considering the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of McDowell & Co case reported in 154 ITR 148, the above transaction the Assessing Officer rightly treated the same as a colorable transaction to reduce taxable income of the assessee. He lastly pointed out that the Assessing Officer was right disallowing the claim of long term capital loss artificially created in the books of assessee. 10. On careful consideration of above submissions, and…

Avantha Realty Limited (Previously Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee as well as of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1196/DEL/2022[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2004-05 The Dcit, Central Circle-20, Delhi Avantha Realty Ltd., (Previous Known As Janpath Vs. Investment & Holding Ltd.) 124, Thapar House, Janpath, Central Delhi 110001 Pan Aaacj 8030 A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2004-05 Avantha Realty Ltd., The Dcit, Central Circle-20, Delhi (Previous Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd.) Vs. 124, Thapar House, Janpath, Central Delhi 110001 Pan Aaacj 8030 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Upvan Gupta, Adv

…, disallowed. Thus, this transaction, entered into and executed through an agreement signed over a non judicial stamp paper of Rs.50/- only is treated as sham. Considering the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of McDowell & Co case reported in 154 ITR 148, the above transaction the Assessing Officer rightly treated the same as a colorable transaction to reduce taxable income of the assessee. He lastly pointed out that the Assessing Officer was right disallowing the claim of long term capital loss artificially created in the books of assessee. 10. On careful consideration of above submissions, and…

Shri Nasir Ahmed Rangshu, Anantnag vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Srinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 73/ASR/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115BSection 132ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 69A

…to the surrounding circumstances to find out the realities and the matter has to be considered by applying test of human probabilities as enunciated r Hon’ble Apex Court. Reliance is also placed on judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in McDowell & Co. Ltd (1985) 154 ITR 148 where it was observed that “Colorable devices cannot be part of tax planning and it was wrong to encourage or entertain the belief that is honorable to avoid the payment of tax by resorting to dubious methods’. Every person is entitled to so arrange his affairs as to avoid taxation but the arrangement must be real and genuine and not sham and mak…

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta

Section 92C

…ious method adopted by the assessee company in order to avail benefit of setting off of the long term capital loss arising on sale of shares of BSPL by applying the doctrine laid down by the Hon‟be Supreme Court in the case of Mcdowell & Company Ltd. vs. CTO, 154 ITR 148 (SC), accordingly, AO denied the claim for deduction of long term capital loss of Rs.922 crores arising on sale of share of BSPL held by the assessee company. 15. The other addition made by the Assessing Officer is disallowance of depreciation on WDV of Rs.27,20,59,980/- of the machine leased out to BSPL. The factual matrix of the issue is as un…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta

Section 92C

…ious method adopted by the assessee company in order to avail benefit of setting off of the long term capital loss arising on sale of shares of BSPL by applying the doctrine laid down by the Hon‟be Supreme Court in the case of Mcdowell & Company Ltd. vs. CTO, 154 ITR 148 (SC), accordingly, AO denied the claim for deduction of long term capital loss of Rs.922 crores arising on sale of share of BSPL held by the assessee company. 15. The other addition made by the Assessing Officer is disallowance of depreciation on WDV of Rs.27,20,59,980/- of the machine leased out to BSPL. The factual matrix of the issue is as un…

McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO

What is McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. CTO

ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-14, New Delhi

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ACIT Central Circle-14, New Delhi vs. Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

Neha Jewellers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

Jm Financial Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3), Mumbai

DCIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. J.M. Financial Ltd, Mumbai

Dristi Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(2), Ghaziabad

DCIT-CC 5(2), Mumbai vs. Jetair Private Limited, New Delhi

Sanjeevkumar Manchand Rajput, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

Sanjeevkumar Manchand Rajput, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Nashik

Raigarh Jute & Textile Mills Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-8(2), Kolkata

DCIT, Central Circle-20, New Delhi vs. Avantha Realty Ltd (Previous Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd), Delhi

Avantha Realty Limited (Previously Known As Janpath Investment & Holding Ltd.), Gurgaon vs. ACIT Central Circle-20, Delhi

Shri Nasir Ahmed Rangshu, Anantnag vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Srinagar

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune