Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT

31 ITR 735High Court1957#17693 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT

AGRA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AGRA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1, AGRA

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

ITA 216/AGR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2021AY 2011-12

Section 124Section 142Section 153

…ion of income by overriding title. ITA No.216/Agr/2016, 183/Agr/2014,439/Agr/2015 & ITA No. 177/Agr/2014 26 RAJA BEJOY SINGH DUDURIA VS. CIT(1933) 1 ITR 135 (PC) Prince Khanderao Gaekwar vs. CIT (1948) 16 ITR 294 (Bom) Seth Motilal Manekchand vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 735 (BOM) CIT VS. TOLLYGUNGE CLUB LTD.(1977)107 ITR 776(SC) JIT & PAL X-RAYS (P) LTD. S. CIT (2004) 134 TAXMAN 62 (ALL) (3) Most of the functions carried out by the appellant authority are functions of state and the income accruing in performance of such functions is inherently charitable- Union of India vs. R.C.Jain (1981 AIR 951) Bureau of Indian S…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 997/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2009-10 Creation Publicity Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 1St Floor, Parekh Vora Ward-2(1)(2), बनाम/ Chambers, 66, Nagindas Mumbai. Vs. Master Road, Fort, Mumbai. (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcc 2192 B

…legal obligation to maintain. The IT Act does not permit of any deduction from the total income in such circumstances." The Bombay High Court, reversed the order of the Tribunal relying on two of its earlier decisions in Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 735 (Born) / [TS-5-HC-1957(BOM)] and Prince Khanderao Gaekwar v. CIT [(19414 € ITR 294] I [TS-1- HC-1948(BOM)] and held that, as observed those two cases, the test was the same, even though there was no specific charge upon property, so long as there was an obligation upon the assessee to pay, which could be enforced in a Court of law, the income to t…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 999/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…legal obligation to maintain. The IT Act does not permit of any deduction from the total income in such circumstances." The Bombay High Court, reversed the order of the Tribunal relying on two of its earlier decisions in Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 735 (Born) / [TS-5-HC-1957(BOM)] and Prince Khanderao Gaekwar v. CIT [(19414 € ITR 294] I [TS-1-HC-1948(BOM)] and held that, as observed those two cases, the test was the same, even though there was no specific charge upon property, so long as there was an obligation upon the assessee to pay, which could be enforced in a Court of law, the income to th…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 998/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…legal obligation to maintain. The IT Act does not permit of any deduction from the total income in such circumstances." The Bombay High Court, reversed the order of the Tribunal relying on two of its earlier decisions in Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 735 (Born) / [TS-5-HC-1957(BOM)] and Prince Khanderao Gaekwar v. CIT [(19414 € ITR 294] I [TS-1-HC-1948(BOM)] and held that, as observed those two cases, the test was the same, even though there was no specific charge upon property, so long as there was an obligation upon the assessee to pay, which could be enforced in a Court of law, the income to th…

CREATION PUBLICITY PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1000/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia

For Appellant: Shri Hero Rai, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. N. Hemalatha, D.R

…legal obligation to maintain. The IT Act does not permit of any deduction from the total income in such circumstances." The Bombay High Court, reversed the order of the Tribunal relying on two of its earlier decisions in Seth Motilal Manekchand v. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 735 (Born) / [TS-5-HC-1957(BOM)] and Prince Khanderao Gaekwar v. CIT [(19414 € ITR 294] I [TS-1-HC-1948(BOM)] and held that, as observed those two cases, the test was the same, even though there was no specific charge upon property, so long as there was an obligation upon the assessee to pay, which could be enforced in a Court of law, the income to th…