What is Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT authority for?

The amounts received by an assessee, when regarded as capital receipts, do not fall within the definition of "income" under Section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act and are thus not chargeable to tax, unless specifically included by a statutory provision.

How many judgments cite Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT?

56 judgments on BharatTax cite Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT (195 ITR 877), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 1961, Section 2(24), Section 143(3), Section 143(2), Section 14A, Section 115JB.

Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT (195 ITR 877)

DCIT Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. Dhunseri Ventures Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1780/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Kolkata..……………………….……….……….……Appellant Vs. M/S Dhunseri Ventures Ltd…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 4A, Dhunseri House, Woodburn Park, Kol - 700020.. [Pan: Aabck1597K] Appearances By: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 08, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2014-15 DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata..……………………….……….……….……Appellant vs. M/s Dhunseri Ventures Ltd…………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent 4A, Dhunseri House, Woodburn Park, Kol - 700020.. [PAN: AABCK1597K] Appearances by: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 08, 2025 Date of pronounci…

Mohammed Fakhre Alam Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-52, Mumbai

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

ITA 6513/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2016-17 Mohammed Fakhre Alam The Assessing Officer, Shaikh, Ward-17(2)(3), New Usmaniya Washing, Vs. Mumbai. Noor Mansion, 111, Janjikar Street, Crawford Market, Mumbai-400003. Pan : Bhops3293R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana

Section 54FSection 56(2)(vii)

…tax Act. Section 2(24)(vi) provides that income includes "any capital gains chargeable under section 45", and, thus, it is clear that a capital receipt simplicitor cannot be taken as income. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Padmraje R. Kardambande vs CIT (195 ITR 877) has observed that "...we hold that the amounts received by the assessee during the financial years in question have to beregarded as capital receipts, and, therefore, (emphasis supplied by us), are not income within meaning of section 2(24) of the Income tax Act... This clearly implies, as is the settled legal position in our understanding, that…

Krishnakant Sharma (Lh of Late Vimaladevi Sharma), Mumabi vs. Income Tax Officer - 23(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 418/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 147Section 250

…tax Act. Section 2(24)(vi) provides that income includes "any capital gains chargeable under section 45", and, thus, it is clear that a capital receipt simplicitor cannot be taken as income. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Padmraje R. Kardambande vs CIT (195 ITR 877) has observed that "..., we hold that the amounts received by the assessee during the financial years in question have to be regarded as capital receipts, and, therefore, (emphasis supplied by us), are not income within meaning of section 2(24) of the Income tax Act...." This clearly implies, as is the settled legal position in our understanding…

Krishnakant Sharma (Lh of Late Vimaladevi Sharma), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 23(3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 417/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 147Section 250

…tax Act. Section 2(24)(vi) provides that income includes "any capital gains chargeable under section 45", and, thus, it is clear that a capital receipt simplicitor cannot be taken as income. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Padmraje R. Kardambande vs CIT (195 ITR 877) has observed that "..., we hold that the amounts received by the assessee during the financial years in question have to be regarded as capital receipts, and, therefore, (emphasis supplied by us), are not income within meaning of section 2(24) of the Income tax Act...." This clearly implies, as is the settled legal position in our understanding…

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 89/ALLD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.87,88 & 89/Alld/2020 AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 Allahabad Development Authority, 7th & 8th ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow Floor, Indira Bhawan, Civil Lines, Allahabad, U.P. PAN:AAALA0144P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue by: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR Date of hearing: 29.11.2024 Date of pronouncement: 31.01.2025 O R D E R PER SHRI. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: These three appeals, all filed by the assessee, bearing…

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 88/ALLD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.87,88 & 89/Alld/2020 AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 Allahabad Development Authority, 7th & 8th ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow Floor, Indira Bhawan, Civil Lines, Allahabad, U.P. PAN:AAALA0144P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue by: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR Date of hearing: 29.11.2024 Date of pronouncement: 31.01.2025 O R D E R PER SHRI. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: These three appeals, all filed by the assessee, bearing…

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

In the result all three appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 87/ALLD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad31 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish Bansal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 143(3)Section 2(15)Section 260A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.87,88 & 89/Alld/2020 AYs. 2014-15 to 2016-17 Allahabad Development Authority, 7th & 8th ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow Floor, Indira Bhawan, Civil Lines, Allahabad, U.P. PAN:AAALA0144P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sh. Ashish Bansal, Advocate Revenue by: Sh. Amalendu Nath Mishra, CIT DR Date of hearing: 29.11.2024 Date of pronouncement: 31.01.2025 O R D E R PER SHRI. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: These three appeals, all filed by the assessee, bearing…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Prakash Nimmagadda, Hyderabad, Secunderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 974/HYD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.Cit Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acbpn4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.C. Devdas, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order, Dated 20/03/2017 Of The Learned Cit (A)-9, Hyderabad, Relating To A.Y.2008-09. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds:

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR)

Section 17(2)(c)Section 28

…ITA No 974 of 2017 Prakash Nimmagadda आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha, G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.974/Hyd/2017 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Dy.CIT Vs. Shri Prakash Nimmagadda Circle 1(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN:ACBPN4246R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, CA राज" व "ारा/Revenue by:: Dr. Meghnath Chowhan, CIT(DR) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 06/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 16/12/2024 आदेश/ORDER Per Vijay P…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shree Pushkar Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2696/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Sagar (virtually present) & Shri Vipul JainFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt (Sr. DR)

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 54Section 80J

…hat, as per the Article 265 of the Constitution of India state that, taxes shall be levied or collect except without the authority of law. In this regard, the appellant has relied on the decision of Apex Court in case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 877 (SC), Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Cement Ltd. (Appeal No. 85/2014 and 204/2010 dated 22.08.2017, Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd (ITA No. 1132 of 2014, dated 04.01.2017), Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of PCIT v. Ankit Metal & Power Ltd [2019] 109 taxmann.com 93 (Cal) and Hon’ble…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 242/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.177/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Economic Explosives Ltd. 11, Zade Layout, Bharat Nagar ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 033 PAN – AAACE3871C v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–1(2), Nagpur ITA no.242/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) Economic Explosives Ltd. 11, Zade Layout, Bharat Nagar ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 033 PAN – AAACE3871C v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–1, Nagpur Assessee…

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

In the result, appeal for the assessment year 2018–19 filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 177/NAG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mani JainFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.177/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Economic Explosives Ltd. 11, Zade Layout, Bharat Nagar ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 033 PAN – AAACE3871C v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–1(2), Nagpur ITA no.242/Nag./2023 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) Economic Explosives Ltd. 11, Zade Layout, Bharat Nagar ……………. Appellant Nagpur 440 033 PAN – AAACE3871C v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–1, Nagpur Assessee…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Buhari Holdings Privae Limited, Chennai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 325/CHNY/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.325/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-2011) The Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Buhari Holdings Pvt. Ltd, Income Tax, No.4, Buhari Towers, Corporate Circle 1(2) Moores Road, Chennai. Chennai 600 006. [Pan Aaacb 2679M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Arv Srinivasan, Irs, Addl Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 20.06.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri ARV Srinivasan, IRS, Addl CIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 28

…, and, therefore, when a particular advantage, perquisite or receipt is not in the nature of income, there cannot be any occasion to bring the same to tax under section 28(iv) of the Act. 7. Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Padmaraje R Kadambande vs CIT (195 ITR 877) observed that, "... we hold that the amounts received by the assessee during the financial year in question have to be regarded as capital receipts, and, therefore, are not income within meaning of section 2(24) of the Income Tax Act."(Emphasis by underlining supplied by us). This clearly shows, as is the settled law that a capital receipt, in p…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2200/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2199/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2198/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 2197/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 1572/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 1571/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 1570/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the assessee for AY 2011-12 and subsequent

ITA 1569/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jan 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT,DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 801BSection 80I

…be included in the profit should be having the characteristic of income. There is a fundamental difference between the income and capital that the income is liable to tax, whereas capital is not liable to tax. In the case of Padmaraje R. Kadambande vs. CIT in 195 ITR 877. the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the capital receipts are not income within the definition of Section 2(24) of the Act and hence are not chargeable under the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel further stated that the provision of Section 115-JB of the Act is alternative mechanism for computation of income based on book profit without claimin…

Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT

What is Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Padmaraje R. Kadambande v. CIT

DCIT Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. Dhunseri Ventures Limited, Kolkata

Mohammed Fakhre Alam Shaikh, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-52, Mumbai

Krishnakant Sharma (Lh of Late Vimaladevi Sharma), Mumabi vs. Income Tax Officer - 23(3)(5), Mumbai

Krishnakant Sharma (Lh of Late Vimaladevi Sharma), Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer - 23(3)(5), Mumbai

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

Allahabad Development Authority, Allahabad vs. ACIT (Exemption), Lucknow

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Prakash Nimmagadda, Hyderabad, Secunderabad

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Shree Pushkar Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd, Mumbai

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. National E Assessment Centre, New Delhi

Economic Explosives Limited, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1 (2), Nagpur

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. Buhari Holdings Privae Limited, Chennai

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi

Uflex Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi