What is Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row,CIT authority for?

Whether an income falls under one head of income or another is to be decided according to the common notions of a practical man, as the Income-tax Act provides no specific guidance. The Income-tax Act provides no specific guidance for determining the appropriate head of income.

How many judgments cite Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row,CIT?

87 judgments on BharatTax cite Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row,CIT (61 ITR 428), spanning 1993 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row,CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 115BBE, Section 14, Section 56, Section 132, Section 153A.

Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row,CIT (61 ITR 428)

Samir S Mehta, Maharashtra vs. CIT (A)-4, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 42/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.42/Srt/2022 Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Samir Shantilal Mehta, Vs. The Acit, Central Circle-4, 1003, 10Th Floor, Sagardeep, South Surat. Ridge Road, Malabar Hill, Mumbai – 400006. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aacpm5453D (Assessee) (Respondent) Shri Vartik Choksi & Biren Shah, Ar Assessee By Respondent By Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/04/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/05/2023

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 69A

…2015 dt 30-09-2016]; ITA.42/SRT/2022/AY.2017-18 Samir Shantilal Mehta • Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lakhmichand Baijnath Vs CIT as reported in 35 ITR 416; • Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Nalini Kant Ambalal Mody vs SAL Narayan Row as reported in 61 ITR 428. Considering the submission made and decisions referred, it is undisputed that the assessee is having only source of income from Trading and Manufacturing of jewellery. The additional income was offered on account of difference in the stock as per books of accounts and as actually found during the course of search. The difference in stock as fund…

Thakordas Parekh & Sons, Na vs. Arivs.Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Navsari

In the result, ground No. 2 & 3

ITA 167/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.167/Srt/2022 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Thakordas Parekh & Sons Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bazar Street, Chikhli, Navsari, 204, 2Nd Floor, Vs Navsari-396530 Income Tax Office, Pan No: Aabft 4593 J Charpool, Awabaug, Navsari-396445 अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 05.01.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 30.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 23.03.2022 For Assessment Year 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 R.W.S143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 30.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case As Well As Law On The Subject, The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Thakordas Parekh & Sons Of Assessing Officer In Rejecting The Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3) Of The Act.

Section 115BSection 144Section 145(3)Section 254(1)Section 68

…115BBE is not applicable in assessees case.To support such submission, Ld. AR for the assessee relied upon on the following case law:  Dr. T.A. Qureshi vs. CIT 287 ITR 547 (SC)  Lakhmichand Baijnnath vs. CIT 35 ITR 416 (SC)  Nalinikant Ambalal Mody vs. CIT 61 ITR 428 (SC)  CIT vs. D.P. Sandu Bros. Chembur (P.) Ltd. 273 ITR 1 (SC)  CIT vs. Shilpa dyeing & Printing Mills (P.) Ltd. 39 taxmann.com 3 (Guj)  J.K. Chokshi vs. ACIT Tax Appeal No.149 of 2003 (Guj)  Green Associates vs. PCIT -Tax Appeal No.1199 of 2018 (Guj)  DCIT vs. Radhe Developers India Ltd. 329 ITR 1 (Guj)  CIT vs. Mhaskar General Hospital in…

DCIT, Central-2, Indore vs. Shri Krihna Kumar Verma, Indore

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 185/IND/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG (Judicial Member), SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI (Accountant Member)

Section 115BSection 139Section 153ASection 69ASection 69B

…e of DCIT vs RamnarayanBorla [Appeal No 482/ JP/ 2015 dt 30- 09-2016]; • Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lakhmichand Baijnath Vs CIT as reported in 35 ITR 416; • Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Nalini Kant Ambalal Mody vs SAL Narayan Row as reported in 61 ITR 428. Therefore, firstly the AO erred in totality by applying amended provisions of section 115BBE in the case of appellant. Furthermore, search and survey action in the case of appellant were carried out on 28.09.2016 and the appellant made voluntary disclosure during the course of search and survey. The amendment was inserted on 15.12.2016 which is s…

S N Tradelink Private Limited, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Surat

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 77/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.77/Srt/2022 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) S. N. Tradelink Private Limited, Principal Commissioner Of 3010-3011 Momai Complex, Income Tax-1, Room No. 114, 1St Kadodra Road, Umarvada, Surat – Vs. Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, 395010. Majura Gate, Opp New Civil Hospital, Surat-395001 (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs0060R

Section 115BSection 131Section 133ASection 139Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271ASection 69C

…of the assessee and the explanation as to how the amounts came to be received was rejected by the Income-tax authorities, the Income-tax authorities were entitled to treat the credits as business receipts chargeable to tax." • Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v/s. CIT 61 ITR 428 (SC) It has been held by Honourable Supreme Court that "whether an income falls under one head or another has to be decided according to the common notions of practical man because the Act does not provide any guidance in the matter." • CIT v/s. DP. Sandu Bros. Chembur (P.) Ltd. - 273 ITR 1 (SC) It has been held by Honourable Supreme Court that "t…

DCIT, Circle-2(3), Surat vs. Swastik Enterprises, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are allowed

ITA 173/SRT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) D.C.I.T., Swastik Enterprises, Circle-2(3), R.S. No. 130, F.P. 36, T.P.S. 37, Vs. Surat. Behind Althan Gam, Althan, Surat. Pan No. Aakfm 1069 M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 254(1)

…cannot be left on the will of assessee, who could make convenient entry in the books of account to avoid taxes. Hence, the accounting entries cannot be the sole criteria. The ld. CIT(A) by referring the case of Natinkant Ambalal Mody Vs SAL Narayan Row (1966) 61 ITR 428 (SC) held that method of book keeping followed by an assessee would not decide under which head a particular income will go. The ld. CIT(A) further noted that the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in Pr.CIT Vs Kalptaru Power Transmission Ltd. (2017) 148 DTR 257 has held that if income does not at all, arise there cannot be a tax, even though in bo…

Commissioner of Income Tax TDS vs. M/S Mewar Hospital Pvt Ltd

ITA/6/2021HC Rajasthan01 Nov 2022

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

Rekha Shekhawat, Kota vs. Pr.CIT, Udaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanajy Dhariwal, CIT

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271A

…vs. CIT [1962] 44 ITR 362 (SC) held that these heads are in a sense exclusive to one another and income which falls within one head cannot be brought to tax under another head. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v CIT [1966] 61 ITR 428, has held that whether an income falls under one head or another is to be decided according to the common notions of practical man because the Act does not provide any guidance in the matter. Of course, lot of judicial precedents are available to a taxpayer to arrive at a conclusion about determination of appropriate head of income. 4.4 It is subm…

ITO 25(2)(5), Mumbai vs. Kirit Raojibhai Patel, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the learned AO is dismissed

ITA 2339/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Sri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm The Income Tax Officer- Kirit Raojibhai Patel 25(2)(5) 5Th Floor Ram Niwas, 34, Room No. 506, C-10, Vallabhnagar, N.S. Road, Vs. Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Bkc, Juhu, Vile Parele(W), Mumbai-400 051 Mumbai-400 049 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabpp3139J Assessee Represented By : Shri Rashmikant Choksey, Ar Department Represented By : Shri K.K. Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 08.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.02.2022

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 2Section 45Section 50Section 54Section 54F

…pted from capital gains by the statute could be taxed as a casual or non-recurring receipt under section 10(3) read with section 56. We are fortified in our view by a similar argument being rejected in Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row, CIT [1966] 61 ITR 428 (SC).' 11. Thus, the conclusion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is that an asset which is capable of acquisition at a cost would be included within the provisions pertaining to the head "Capital gains" as opposed to assets in the acquisition of which no cost at all can be conceived. In the present case as well, the situation was that the FSI/TDR was…

DCIT (Central)-2, Indore vs. Punjab Retail (P) Ltd., Indore

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

ITA 677/IND/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Borad& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Agrawal, CA & Shri PankajFor Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT DR

Section 115BSection 132Section 133ASection 143(3)

…e of DCIT vs Ramnarayan Borla [Appeal No 482/ JP/ 2015 dt 30-09-2016]; • Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lakhmichand Baijnath Vs CIT as reported in 35 ITR 416; • Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Nalini Kant Ambalal Mody vs SAL Narayan Row as reported in 61 ITR 428. Considering the submission made and decisions referred, it is undisputed that the appellant is having only source of income from Trading and Manufacturing of jewellery. The additional income was offered on account of difference in the stock as per books of accounts and as actually found during the course of search. The difference in stock as fund…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Kenmore Vikas India (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2673/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kambleasstt. Year 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 24

…reme Court held that the heads of income must be decided from the nature of the income by applying practical notions and not by reference to an assessee's treatment of income. Again the Apex Court in the case of Nalinikant Ambalal Mody vs. S.A.L. Narayan Rao (61 ITR 428) observed that the several heads of income mentioned in section 6 are mutually exclusive; a particular income can come only under one of them. It was held following the principle of the decision in UCO Bank Ltd. case that, if a particular income is taxable as income from property under section 9 (of 1922 Act), any residual receipt from the propert…

Orissa State Co-Operative Handicrafts Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 393/CTK/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.392&393/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014 – 2015 & 2015-2016) M/S Orissa State Co-Operative Vs. Ito Wardd-4(1), Handicrafts Corporation Limited Bhubaneswar D-2/3, Industrial Estate, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaaao 0096 K (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Goutam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam, CIT-DR

Section 80P(2)

…ax Act or an income ca not be chargeable under any other heads of income. -CIT v. Basant Rai Takhat Singh, (1933) 1 ITR 197, 201 (PC) -Bihar State Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (1960) 39 ITR 114, 122 (SC) -Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L Narayan Row, (1966) 61 ITR 428, 431 (SC) Income for the purposes of charge of income tax and computation of total income has been classified u/s 14 of the Income Tax Act in 5 head of income Viz. Salary, Income from House property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources. In the case of H.G Kothari v. CIT (1951)20 ITR 579 (Mad).…

Orissa State Co-Operative Handicrafts Corporation Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee i

ITA 392/CTK/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.392&393/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014 – 2015 & 2015-2016) M/S Orissa State Co-Operative Vs. Ito Wardd-4(1), Handicrafts Corporation Limited Bhubaneswar D-2/3, Industrial Estate, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. : Aaaao 0096 K (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. यनधागररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Goutam, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 20/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 05/06/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am :

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Goutam, CIT-DR

Section 80P(2)

…ax Act or an income ca not be chargeable under any other heads of income. -CIT v. Basant Rai Takhat Singh, (1933) 1 ITR 197, 201 (PC) -Bihar State Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT (1960) 39 ITR 114, 122 (SC) -Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L Narayan Row, (1966) 61 ITR 428, 431 (SC) Income for the purposes of charge of income tax and computation of total income has been classified u/s 14 of the Income Tax Act in 5 head of income Viz. Salary, Income from House property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources. In the case of H.G Kothari v. CIT (1951)20 ITR 579 (Mad).…