Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT

27 ITR 1Supreme Court of India1955#3094 most cited

What is Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT authority for?

A shareholder has no interest in the property of a company. A shareholder's right is limited to participating in profits if and when the company decides to distribute them.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT · shareholder interest in company property · shareholder rights · company profits · corporate law

Sections most often in play

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 234BSection 234C
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 142adcf methodsanctioning authorityfull value of considerationapproval under section 151valuation of sharessection 151(2)extension of limitationblock of assetsshort term capital gainskelvinatorsection 48

Judgments citing Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT

ITO, Ward - 3(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Pdp Steels Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 2407/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: "ी जे. सुधाकर रे"डी, लेखा सद"य एवं/And "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य) [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 80I

…ved from the industrial undertaking within the meaning of section 80IC of the Act and for coming to such a conclusion, we rely on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pandian Chemicals Vs. CIT 362 ITR 278 (SC) and Bacha F Guzdar Vs. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 1. However, we note that this issue has not been decided by the Ld. CIT(A) . 6. Coming the interest income earned for delayed payment from customers, we note that assessee manufactures C. R. Coil and sell the same to the customers on credit. And if there is any delay in receipt of payment from the customers and since it affects the assessee’s working…

The DCIT, Cochin vs. M.S Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 190/COCH/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…tive source is rent, which has suffered the accident of non-payment and rent is not land within the meaning of the definition." 12. The judgment in CIT v Raja. Bhadur Kamakhaya Narayan Singh (16 ITR 325) was approved by the Apex Court in Bacha F.Guzdar v CIT (27 ITR 1). Another provision where this expression occurs is section 80(HH) of the Act. This provision came up for consideration of the Apex Court in Pandian Chemlals Ltd. v Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai ([2003] 262 ITR 278). In this judgment, after referring to the aforesaid precedents, it was held that the words 'derived from' in section 80-HH must b…

M/S.Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin vs. The Adcit, Cochin

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 310/COCH/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…tive source is rent, which has suffered the accident of non-payment and rent is not land within the meaning of the definition." 12. The judgment in CIT v Raja. Bhadur Kamakhaya Narayan Singh (16 ITR 325) was approved by the Apex Court in Bacha F.Guzdar v CIT (27 ITR 1). Another provision where this expression occurs is section 80(HH) of the Act. This provision came up for consideration of the Apex Court in Pandian Chemlals Ltd. v Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai ([2003] 262 ITR 278). In this judgment, after referring to the aforesaid precedents, it was held that the words 'derived from' in section 80-HH must b…

Cochin International Airport Ltd, Cochin vs. The DCIT, Cochin

In the result, appeals of the Revenue in ITA Nos

ITA 344/COCH/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Nov 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 143(3)Section 80I

…tive source is rent, which has suffered the accident of non-payment and rent is not land within the meaning of the definition." 12. The judgment in CIT v Raja. Bhadur Kamakhaya Narayan Singh (16 ITR 325) was approved by the Apex Court in Bacha F.Guzdar v CIT (27 ITR 1). Another provision where this expression occurs is section 80(HH) of the Act. This provision came up for consideration of the Apex Court in Pandian Chemlals Ltd. v Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai ([2003] 262 ITR 278). In this judgment, after referring to the aforesaid precedents, it was held that the words 'derived from' in section 80-HH must b…

Randox Laboratories (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 800/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.433/Bang/2016 Assessment year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Randox Laboratories India Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 5(1)(1), Plot No.191-195 & 246-250, Bangalore. KIADB Industrial Area, Bommasandra Jigani Link Road Bengaluru – 560 105. PAN: AADCR 0074K APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.800/Bang/2016 Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Randox Laboratories India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 105. Ci…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Randox Laboratories India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed and the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 433/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Respondent: Shri C.H. Sundar Rao, CIT(DR-I), ITAT, Bangalore
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A No.433/Bang/2016 Assessment year : 2011-12 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Randox Laboratories India Income Tax, Private Limited, Circle 5(1)(1), Plot No.191-195 & 246-250, Bangalore. KIADB Industrial Area, Bommasandra Jigani Link Road Bengaluru – 560 105. PAN: AADCR 0074K APPELLANT RESPONDENT IT(TP)A No.800/Bang/2016 Assessment year : 2011-12 M/s. Randox Laboratories India Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Private Limited, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 105. Ci…

Ntt Data Global Delivery Services Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5196/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishintt Data Global Delivery Vs. Dcit, Services Ltd, Circle-13(1), No. 17, South End Road, New Delhi Bangalore Pan: Aabck7777J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Purushottam, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, CIT DR
Section 10Section 10ASection 143

…s rent, which has suffered the accident of non-payment. And rent is not land within the meaning of the definition." This definition was approved and reiterated in 1955 by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the decision of Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 1 (SC). It is clear, therefore, that the words 'derived from' is s.80HH of the IT Act, 1961 must be understood as something which has direct or immediate nexus with the appellant's industrial undertaking. Although electricity may be required for the purposes of the industrial undertaking, the deposit required for its supply is a step removed from the…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S. Angel Infrastructure Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 761/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta
Section 147Section 151

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 464/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke M/s Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., D.C.I.T., Vs. B-5, Vrindavan Apartment, Kings Road, Circle-2, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCA 2023 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 761/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cu…

M/S Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

ITA 464/JPR/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Dec 2018AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain &For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta
Section 147Section 151

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 464/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cuke M/s Angel Infrastructure (P) Ltd., D.C.I.T., Vs. B-5, Vrindavan Apartment, Kings Road, Circle-2, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCA 2023 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 761/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2009-10 cu…

DCIT, Cir.7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gala Precision Technology Pvt. Ltd., Thane

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2675/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Bleasst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, V. M/S. Gala Precision Technology Pvt. Ltd. Circle – 7(1)(1), Room No. 23, 102-A, Orion Business Park, Near Cine Ground Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Wonder, Ghodbunder Road, Thane (W) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan No: Aaacg 1777 F

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 80H

…ent, which has suffered the accident of non-payment. And rent is not land within the meaning of the definition. 7. This definition was approved and reiterated in 1955 by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the decision of Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar vs. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 1 (SC) at p. 7. It is clear, therefore, that the word 'derived from' in s- 80HH of the IT Act, 1961, must be understood as something which has direct or immediate nexus with the appellant's industrial undertaking. Although electricity may be required for the purposes of the industrial undertaking, the deposit required for its supply is a step removed…

ACIT, Cir-35, Kolkata vs. Shri Manoj Murarka, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 294/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…t the company does not claim exemption from liability to tax under Section 4(3)(viii) : it claims exemption because the receipt is not income which is chargeable to tax under Section 12 under the head 'Dividend'. The case of Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT [1955] 27 ITR 1 (SC) has, therefore, no application to this case." Capital gain, in fact, is made taxable by Section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as such a special deeming provision was felt necessary because capital gains would not otherwise come within the ordinary commercial concept of profit. By virtue of the definition of "Capital asset", inSection 5 Man…

Commr of Income Tax vs. Uniplas India Ltd

The appeal is allowed

ITR/2/2004HC Delhi19 Oct 2016

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

Section 80Section 80HSection 80J

…has suffered the accident of non-payment. And rent is not land within the meaning of the definition." (p.328) This definition was approved and reiterated in 1955 by a Constitution Bench of this court in the decision of Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT (1955) 27 ITR 1 . It is clear, therefore, that the word "derived from" in Section 80HH of the Income-tax Act, 1961, must be understood as something which has direct or immediate nexus with the appellant's industrial undertaking. Although electricity may be required for the purposes of the industrial undertaking, the deposit required for its supply is…

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

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1594/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri K.K.Jaiswal, D.RFor Respondent: Sh. M.P.Rastogi, Adv. And Sh. Ajay Marwah, C.A

…o sale of property by M/s Trojan Developers Pvt. Ltd. The property in question continues to be that of the company. There is no transfer of this immovable property. These propositions are well settled. In the case of M/s Bacha F Guzdar, Bombay vs. CIT(Bombay) 27 ITR 1 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows. “The assessee was a shareholder in certain tea companies 60% of whose income was exempt from tax as agricultural income under section 4(3)(viii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee claimed that 60% of the dividend income received by her on her shares in those companies was also exempt from…

M/S.. Upkar International (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 6710/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. : 2003-04 Upkar International (P) Ltd., Dcit, Circle 18(1), C/O J.S. Kochar & Associates, Vs. Cr Building, 209, Sewak Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi 16/2, Wea Karol Bagh, New Delhi – 110 005

For Appellant: Sh. J.S. Kochar & Sh. Udai BirFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 801BSection 80I

…yed payment of such rent was also of agricultural character and was not taxable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has been following the Interpretation given by the Privy Council in Kamakhva Narain Singh's case. In the case of Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar {1955) 27 ITR 1, it was held that where a company-deriving income from agriculture declared dividend, the dividend did not arise from any agricultural source and cannot be claimed to be income derived from agricultural activity In Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. CIT (1997) 239 ITR 297, (SC) while dismissing the appeal 8 A.Y. 2003-04 held that the High Court was clear…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Salora International Ltd

ITA/12/2003HC Delhi13 May 2016

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

For Appellant: Mr Ashok K. Manchanda, Senior StandingFor Respondent: Mr Salil Kapoor, Mr Sanat Kapoor, Ms Ananya
Section 260ASection 391Section 50

…d division. The Panasonic Division was an undertaking owned by the Assessee and not by its shareholders. Whilst shareholders own shares issued by a company, they have no interest in the assets held by the company. In Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT, Bombay: (1955) 27 ITR 1 (SC) a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court explained the above principle in the following words: “That a shareholder acquires a right to participate in the profits of the company may be readily conceded but it is not possible ITA 12/2003 Page 22 of 28 to accept the contention that the shareholder acquires any interest i…

Utv Software Communications Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 11(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3148/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Pawan Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3148/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08 बनाम/ Utv Software The Acit 11(1), Communications Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 1St Floor, Bldg No. 14, Mumbai-400 020 Solitaire Corporate Park, Gutru Hargovindji Marg, Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacu 4122G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Farokh V. Irani ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Pawan Kumar Beerla सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :01.12.2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.12.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per N.K. Billaiya, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Mumbai Dated 21.2.2013 Pertaining To Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Two Substantive Grounds Of Appeal. At The Very Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Stated That Under The Instructions From His Client (Assessee), He Is Not Pressing Ground No. 2, The Same Is Dismissed As Not Pressed.

For Appellant: Shri Farokh V. IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pawan Kumar
Section 115JSection 2Section 48Section 50B

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.3148/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2007-08 बनाम/ UTV Software The ACIT 11(1), Communications Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 1st Floor, Bldg No. 14, Mumbai-400 020 Solitaire Corporate Park, Gutru Hargovindji Marg, Chakala, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 093 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAACU 4122G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by: Shri Farokh V. Irani ""यथ" क" ओर…

Inventurus Knowledge Services P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 5(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee company is partly allowed

ITA 5922/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: - 2009-10 Inventurus Knowledge Services V. Income Tax Officer Pvt. Ltd. 5(2)(1), C/O. Seren Properties Pvt. Ltd. 525, Aaykar Bhavan, (Sez), Unit No. 204, Build No. 5, M.K. Road, Mindspace Airoli Camp, Plot No. Mumbai - 400 020. 3, Gat No. 95, Kalwa Trans, Thane Creek, Midc Industrial Area, Thane Belapur Road, Airoli, Navi Mumbai – 400 708. Pan/Gir No. Aabck4601P

…s is on the assessee company to bring on record cogent material to prove that its case falls with in the four corners of the beneficial provisions. The assessing officer relied upon the Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Bacha F. Guzdar v. CIT 27 ITR 1 (SC) & CIT v. Ramkrishna Deo 35 ITR 312 (SC). Relying upon the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd v. CIT 227 ITR 172 (SC), the assessing officer held that accounting standard prescribed by ICAI cannot override the Act, and thus, rejected the contention of the assessee company by considering…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Weizmann Homes Ltd

ITA/918/2006HC Karnataka04 Mar 2013

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

Section 260Section 260ASection 36(1)(viii)

…n CIT -vs- Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narayan Singh and also the judgment of the Apex Court in Cambay Electric Supply Industrial Co. Ltd. -vs- CIT [1978] 113 ITR 84 (SC) and the constitution Bench in the case of Mrs.Bacha F Guzdar -vs- CIT [1955] 27 ITR 1 (SC) where it is held that the word `derived from' in Section 80HH of the Act must be understood as something which has a direct or immediate nexus with the appellant industrial undertaking. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of of Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax -vs- Sterling Foods reported in ITR 1999 page 57…