Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors.

190 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1991#4886 most cited

What is Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors. authority for?

Income diverted at source by an overriding title, such as for R&R plans of mining areas, is not taxable as the assessee's income.

24

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT · diverted at source · overriding title · R&R plans · mining areas · taxable income · income diversion

Judgments citing Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors.

LORAMITRA RATH,KAIRAPARI KOTSAHI, TANGI vs. DCIT (CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

The appeal is allowed

ITA 314/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack05 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Loramitra Loramitra Rath, Rath, Kairapari Kairapari Vs. Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Kotsahi, Tangi, Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. No.Aebpr 6065 H (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr

For Appellant: Shri Purnendhu Bhusan Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 48

…essment) 6 221 ITR 317 (Guj.) 19 Indermani Jatia vs. CIT 35 ITR 298 (SC) 5 K. | P. Varghese vs. ITO 131 ITR 597(SC) 20 6 K.A. Ramachar v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 25 (SC) 21 24 K.A. Ramachar v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 25 (SC) 22 5 Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 (SC) 23 16 Murlidhar Himatsingka v. CIT [1966] 62 ITR 323 (SC) 24 24 Nariman B. Bharucha’s case (1981) 130 ITR 863 (Bom) 25 9 P. C. Mullick vs. CIT [1938] 6 ITR 206 (SC) 26 13 Poona Electric Supply Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [1965] 57 ITR 521 (SC) 27 2 Raja Bejoy Singh Dudhuria vs. CIT [1933] 1 ITR 135 (SC) 28 13 29 Rajkot District Gopalak Co-op. Milk Produc…

THE JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD vs. THE GENERAL CO. OP. BANK LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 373/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: The Tribunal. The Appeal Is Filed Before The Tribunal On 26.06.2020 Whereas The Appeals Ought To Have Been Filed On Or Before 23.05.2020 This Period Falls Under Covid-Pandemic Situation, Thus Following Hon’Ble Supreme Court Judgment Dated 23.3.2020 In Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 Of 2020, Vide Hon’Ble Supreme Court Has Extended Time Limit For Filing Appeals W.E.F. 15.3.2020. Thus, There Is No Delay In Filing The Above Appeals & Accordingly The Appeals Are Taken For Adjudication On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT/DR &For Respondent: Shri A.P. Nanavaty, A.R
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 21(2)Section 263

…ts and in-fact such liability has been fully paid off to DICGCI and therefore till such obligation all funds realised by bank under liquidation are diverted at source entire income of assessee based on observation in the case of Moti Lai Chhadami Jain v/s CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC) r.w. judgment in the case of Smt. Sarla Dew K. v/s. CIT 222 ITR 211 (Kerala) and associated Power Company Ltd. 218 I T R 195 (SC.) therefore entire interest income and share dividend income is diverted at-source and bank under liquidation has no discretion or authority to apply such funds as it wishes and hence such funds are not available to…

SHREE LAXMI CO. OP. BANK LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, AHMEDABAD-5, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 597/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 596/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Nanavaty, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 72

…ts and in fact such liability has been fully paid off to DICGCI and therefore till such obligation all funds realised by bank under liquidation are diverted at source entire income of assessee based on observation in the case of Moti Lal Chhadami Jain v/s CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC) r.w judgement in the case of Smt Sarla Devi K. v/s. CIT 222 ITR 211 (Kerala) and associated. Power Company Ltd. 218 I T R 195 (SC.) therefore entire interest income and share dividend income is diverted at source and bank under liquidation has no discretion or authority to apply such funds as it wishes and hence such funds are not available to…

THE PRAGATI CO. OP. BANK LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT , AHMEDABAD-5, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 596/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 596/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Nanavaty, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Aarsi Prasad, CIT.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 72

…ts and in fact such liability has been fully paid off to DICGCI and therefore till such obligation all funds realised by bank under liquidation are diverted at source entire income of assessee based on observation in the case of Moti Lal Chhadami Jain v/s CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC) r.w judgement in the case of Smt Sarla Devi K. v/s. CIT 222 ITR 211 (Kerala) and associated. Power Company Ltd. 218 I T R 195 (SC.) therefore entire interest income and share dividend income is diverted at source and bank under liquidation has no discretion or authority to apply such funds as it wishes and hence such funds are not available to…

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3319/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…as having been diverted at source by overriding title towards SPV for R & R plans of mining areas. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) CIT vs. SitaldasTirathdas (1961)(41 ITR 367)(SC) (b) Motilal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT (1991)(190 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinariwala (2003)(259 ITR 10)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produce Processing & Export Corporation Ltd (2015)(377 ITR 496)(Kar) (e) CIT vs. United Breweries Ltd (2010)(321 ITR 546)(Kar) (f) CIT vs. A Tosh & Sons (P) Ltd (1987)(166 ITR 867)(Kol) (g) Shroff Eye Centre vs. ACIT (h) Sri T Jayachandran vs. DCIT (…

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3318/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…as having been diverted at source by overriding title towards SPV for R & R plans of mining areas. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) CIT vs. SitaldasTirathdas (1961)(41 ITR 367)(SC) (b) Motilal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT (1991)(190 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinariwala (2003)(259 ITR 10)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produce Processing & Export Corporation Ltd (2015)(377 ITR 496)(Kar) (e) CIT vs. United Breweries Ltd (2010)(321 ITR 546)(Kar) (f) CIT vs. A Tosh & Sons (P) Ltd (1987)(166 ITR 867)(Kol) (g) Shroff Eye Centre vs. ACIT (h) Sri T Jayachandran vs. DCIT (…

M/S GOGGA GURUSANTHAIAH AND BROTHERS ,HOSPET vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 , BELLARY

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3317/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Sivaprasad Reddy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Pradeep Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 37

…as having been diverted at source by overriding title towards SPV for R & R plans of mining areas. Ld.Counsel placed reliance on following decisions in support: (a) CIT vs. SitaldasTirathdas (1961)(41 ITR 367)(SC) (b) Motilal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT (1991)(190 ITR 1)(SC) (c) CIT vs. Sunil J Kinariwala (2003)(259 ITR 10)(SC) (d) CIT vs. Karnataka State Agricultural Produce Processing & Export Corporation Ltd (2015)(377 ITR 496)(Kar) (e) CIT vs. United Breweries Ltd (2010)(321 ITR 546)(Kar) (f) CIT vs. A Tosh & Sons (P) Ltd (1987)(166 ITR 867)(Kol) (g) Shroff Eye Centre vs. ACIT (h) Sri T Jayachandran vs. DCIT (…

SRI. B. RUDRAGOUDA,BELLARY vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 315/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…Co-op Society Ltd. [2017] 390 ITR 415 (Kar) (6) Pr. CIT v. Gyan Enterprises Pvt. LTd. in ITA No.940/2016 dt. 17.5.2018 (Delhi HC). Supreme Court dismissed the SLP by department in SLP No.17347/2019 dated 3.7.2019. (7) Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 (SC) (8) CIT v. Sunil J. Kinariwala [2003] 259 ITR 10 (SC) (9) Poddar Projects Ltd. v. CIT, 28 taxmann.com 94 (Cal) (10) CIT v. A. Tosh & Sons (P) Ltd. [1987] 166 ITR 867 (Cal) (11) F.R. Sabu P Thomas v. UOI, 2015-TIOL-514-HC-Kerala-IT (12) CIT v. DTTDC Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 1 (Del) (13) Shroff Eye Centre v. ACIT in ITA No.1560/Del/2012 (14) DCIT v.…

SRI. B. RUDRAGOUDA,BELLARY vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 314/BANG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K., AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 37Section 37(1)

…Co-op Society Ltd. [2017] 390 ITR 415 (Kar) (6) Pr. CIT v. Gyan Enterprises Pvt. LTd. in ITA No.940/2016 dt. 17.5.2018 (Delhi HC). Supreme Court dismissed the SLP by department in SLP No.17347/2019 dated 3.7.2019. (7) Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 (SC) (8) CIT v. Sunil J. Kinariwala [2003] 259 ITR 10 (SC) (9) Poddar Projects Ltd. v. CIT, 28 taxmann.com 94 (Cal) (10) CIT v. A. Tosh & Sons (P) Ltd. [1987] 166 ITR 867 (Cal) (11) F.R. Sabu P Thomas v. UOI, 2015-TIOL-514-HC-Kerala-IT (12) CIT v. DTTDC Ltd. [2013] 350 ITR 1 (Del) (13) Shroff Eye Centre v. ACIT in ITA No.1560/Del/2012 (14) DCIT v.…

M/S. VEERABHADRAPPA SANGAPPA & COMPANY,SANDUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 1, BELLARY

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1054/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2013–14

For Appellant: Shri Chythanya K.K, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT
Section 145Section 28Section 5

…ntention, reliance was placed on following decisions: Page 53 of 138 A.Y:2013-14 i. CIT vs Sitaldas Tirathdas reported in (1961) 41 ITR 367 (SC) ii. Poona Electric supply Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1965) 57 ITR 521 (SC). iii. Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain vs CIT (1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC). iv. CIT vs Modipon Ltd., (2018) 400 ITR 1 (SC). v. CIT vs TJayavhandran (2018) 406 ITR 1(SC). vi. Pr.CIT vs Gyan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., SLP (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 17347/2019. vii. Pr.CIT vs Gyan Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., ITA 940/2016(DEL) dated 17/05/2018. viii. CIT vs United Breweries Ltd (2010) 321 ITR 4546 (KARN.). ix. CIT vs Pandavapura Sahaka…

INCOME TAX OFFICER-23(1)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIES TRUST 2008 SERIES 14, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue's appeal for A

ITA 4789/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust 2008 Matru Mandir Series 14 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block 3Rd Floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Iii Matru Mandir 2009 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat17440L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) The Ito-23(1)(2) Vs. M/S. Indian Corporate Loan Room No.18 Securities Trust Series Matru Mandir 2008 Series 36 Grant Road Il & Fs Financial Centre Mumbai – 400 007 Plot No.C-22, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaat16925L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Appeals In Ita No.4789/Mum/2017, 4791/Mum/2017 & 4794/Mum/2017 For A.Y.2010-11 Arise Out Of The Order By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-32, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit(A)- 32/It-604/23(1)(2)/2015-16, Cit(A)-32/It-48/19(3)(2)/2012-13 & Cit(A)-32/It-483/Ito-19(3)(4)/12-13 Respectively Dated 24/04/2017 (Ld. Cit(A) In Short) Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As Act) Dated 26/02/2016, 31/10/2012 Respectively By The Ld. Income Tax Officer – 23(1)(2) & 19(3)(2) Respectively, Mumbai (Hereinafter Referred To As Ld. Ao).

Section 10Section 143(3)Section 148Section 161Section 161(1)Section 61

…e account of trustee after the creation of Trust is incorrect. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tulsidas Kilachand v. CIT[1961] 42 ITR 1 as well as the decision in the case of Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT[1991] 190 ITR 1/56 Taxman 40 (SC). Thus, it was the contention of the assessee that all the legal requirements for creation of a valid trust has been fulfilled and the reasons given by the learned CIT(A) to hold the trust to be an invalid trust is not sustainable in law and the assessee trust cannot be regarded as an invalid Trust. 6.5.3 Besides the legal requirem…

DCIT, CIRCLE-3(2),, AHMEDABAD vs. THE JANTA COMMERCIAL CO. OP. BANK LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 538/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 538/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri N. K. Goel, Sr. D.R
Section 139(3)

…The Janta Commercial Co Op Bank Ltd.] A.Y. 2013-14 - 4 - DICGCI and therefore till such obligation all funds realised by bank under liquidation are diverted at source entire income of assessee based on observation in the case of Moti Lal Chhadami Jain v/s CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC) r.w judgement in the case of Smt Sarla Devi K. v/s. CIT 222 ITR 211 (Kerala) and associated. Power Company Ltd. 218 I T R 195 (SC.) therefore entire interest income and share dividend income is diverted at source and bank under liquidation has no discretion or authority to apply such funds as it wishes and hence such funds are not available to…

PERFECT THREAD MILLS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 8(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4964/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu Vice Presedent,(As) Shri D. Karunakar Rao & Shri Amit Shukla, Sh. Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarperfect Thread Mills Ltd Vs Dcit, 8(2), Mumbai 201, Millenium Plaza Behind Sakinaka Telephone Exchange, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai- 72 Pan: Aaacp6449E Appellant Respondednt

Section 13(2)Section 143(3)Section 255(4)Section 48

…llowing decisions were referred and relied upon, some of them will be discussed herein later in this order:- ST. Cases relied upon Citation No. 1 Sitaladas Tirathdas 41ITR 367 (SC) 2 CIT vs. Attili N Rao 252 ITR 880 (SC) 3 Motilal Chahadamilal Jain vs CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC) 4 CIT vs Mathubhai C Patel 238 ITR 403 (SC) 5 CIT vs Roshanbabu Mohd. Hussein Merc 275 ITR 231 (Bom) 6 CIT vs Sharad Sharma 305 ITR 24 (All) 21 ITA 4964/Mum/2013 7 Raja Bejoy Singh Dudhania 1 ITR 135 (PC) 8 Gopinath Paul and Sons vs DCIT 278 ITR 240 (Cal) 9 Addl. CIT vs Glad Investment vt Ltd. 22 ITD 227 (DEL) 5. Now on these facts, and…

INTEGRAL URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1075/JPR/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Us. In This Appeal, The Assessee Bank Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Dilip Shivpuri (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Meena (ACIT)
Section 145Section 234ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 37(1)

…f rule of diversion of income by an overriding title is whether the amount sought to be deducted in truth never reached the assessee as his income." 45. In a recent decision, the Supreme Court in Motilal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT [1991] 94 CTR (SC) 195 :(1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC) explained the connotation of the expressions "reaches the assessee" and "has been received" as has been used by the Court earlier in Sitaldas Tirathdas's case (supra). The Court said : "The expressions "reaches the assessee" and "has been received" have been used not in the sense of the income being received in ITA No. 809/JP/2015 & 1075/JP/20…

ASST CIT 16(2), MUMBAI vs. K.S. AIYAR & CO, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2010-2011 is dismissed

ITA 208/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Asst. Cit 16(2), M/S K.S. Aiyar & Co., Room No. 440, 4Th Floor, F-7, Laxmi Mills, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Shakti Mills Lane, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Off Dr. Moses Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai - 400011 Pan: Aaafk6843P (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Mahesh Rajora (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Rajora (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (DR)
Section 143Section 195(1)Section 37Section 40

…ng the disallowance of payments out of profits of the firm to ex-partner of Rs. 38,92,725/- without appreciating the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of CIT Vs Sitaldas Tirathdas [1991] 41 ITR and Moti Lal ChhadmiLal Jain Vs CIT [1991] 190 ITR 1 that where the obligation to pay, flows out of an antecedent and independent title in the former, it would be a case of diversion of income. But, where the obligations are self-imposed as gratuitous, it is a case of application of income. 3 Assessment Year: 2010-11 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld. CIT (A) wa…

ITO 19(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. INDIAN CORPORATE LOAN SECURITIZATION TRUST 2008 SERIES 14I, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 4343/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Goasinindian Corporate Loan Securitisation Income Tax Officer-9(3)(2) Trust- 2008 Series 14 Mumbai C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Vs. 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent Income Tax Officer-(23)1)(2) Indian Corporate Loan [Erstwhile Ito-19(3)(2)] Securitisation Trust- 2008 Series 14 Room No. 108, Matru Mandir Vs. C/O. Il & Fs Trust Co. Ltd. Tardeo Road, Grant Road 10Th Floor, “G” Block, Bkc Mumbai 400007 Bandra (E), Mumbai 400051 Pan – Aaati6786P Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.E. Dastur &For Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray

…the account of trustee after the creation of Trust is incorrect. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tulsidas Kilachand vs. CIT 42 ITR 1, 6 (SC) as well as the decision in the case of Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain vs. CIT 190 ITR 1 (SC). Thus, it was 6.5.3 Besides the legal requirements, the assessee also put forth the following arguments: (i) When the parties have understood and interpreted the transaction in a particular way, it is not open to the AO to give another interpretation. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Aru…

Commissioner of Income Tax [TDS] vs. Sri VAraha Laxmi Nrusimha Swamy DEvastanam

ITTA/517/2015HC Telangana01 Jun 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

…igation and not a case in which by an overriding charge the assessee became only a collector of another 's income”. 30. The above principle was followed by the Supreme Court in Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors. [(1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC)] and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sunil J.Kinariwala [(2003) 1 SCC 660]. The W.A. No.410/15 & Conn. Cases 88 observations of the Supreme Court in the latter of the above cases are also relevant. “Under the scheme of the IT Act, 1961, it is the total income of an assessee, computed under the provisions of the Act, that is assessabl…

MINAXI KISHORE MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 21(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7871/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Apr 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2008-09 Mrs. Minaxi Kishore Mehta, Ito Ward 21(1), B-21, 3Rd Floor, Paritosh Kapole Bandra, Mumbai. Society, Vile Parle, West, Vs. Mumbai-400049. Pan: Aajpm2912L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Firoz B. AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri U.B.Jakke (DR)
Section 2(47)Section 48Section 56

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2008-09 Mrs. Minaxi Kishore Mehta, ITO Ward 21(1), B-21, 3rd Floor, Paritosh Kapole Bandra, Mumbai. Society, Vile Parle, West, Vs. Mumbai-400049. PAN: AAJPM2912L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Firoz B. Andhyarujina (AR) Revenue by : Shri U.B.Jakke (DR) Date of hearing : 05.04.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 13.04.2016 O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH, JM: 1. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-32, Mumbai dated 2…

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Swapna Lahari Pvt Ltd.,

ITTA/493/2015HC Telangana06 Apr 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

…igation and not a case in which by an overriding charge the assessee became only a collector of another 's income”. 30. The above principle was followed by the Supreme Court in Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors. [(1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC)] and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sunil J.Kinariwala [(2003) 1 SCC 660]. The W.A. No.410/15 & Conn. Cases 88 observations of the Supreme Court in the latter of the above cases are also relevant. “Under the scheme of the IT Act, 1961, it is the total income of an assessee, computed under the provisions of the Act, that is assessabl…

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

ITTA/476/2015HC Telangana29 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

…igation and not a case in which by an overriding charge the assessee became only a collector of another 's income”. 30. The above principle was followed by the Supreme Court in Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi and Ors. [(1991) 190 ITR 1 (SC)] and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Sunil J.Kinariwala [(2003) 1 SCC 660]. The W.A. No.410/15 & Conn. Cases 88 observations of the Supreme Court in the latter of the above cases are also relevant. “Under the scheme of the IT Act, 1961, it is the total income of an assessee, computed under the provisions of the Act, that is assessabl…

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2