Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v. ITO

82 ITR 788Supreme Court of India1971#21561 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2024.

Judgments citing Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v. ITO

M/S. ZASH TRADERS,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BENGALURU

ITA 747/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2020-21
Section 250Section 55Section 55(2)(aa)Section 55(2)(ac)Section 55(2)(b)

…r and the average value should be found by dividing\nthe fair market value opted on 1-1-1954, by the total number of\nshares. The Same view was taken in CIT v. Dalmia Investment Co.\nLtd. [1964] 52 1 TR 567 (SC); Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v.\nITO [1971] 82 ITR 788 (SC); CIT v. Prema Ramanujam [19911 192\nITR 692 (Mad.), CIT v. G.N. Venkatapathy [19971 225 ITR 952/92\nTaxman 401 (Mad.) and CIT v. T.V.S. & Sons Ltd. [1983] 143 ITR\n644 (Mad.).\n22. The Supreme Court in Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd. v. CIT\n[1996] 222 ITR 509/88 Taxman 453 has also accepted the principle\nthat the subsequent issue of bonus shar…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 10(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. DREAM BAKE PVT. LTD., , KOLKATA

ITA 242/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L. Saini

Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 40S(2)(b)

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA Before Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member and Dr. A.L. Saini, Accountant Member ITA No.242/Kol/2018 & C.O No.43/Kol/2018 (a/o ITA No.242/Kol/2018) Assessment Year :2013-14 DCIT, Circle-10(1), V/s. M/s Dream Bake Pvt. Ltd., P-7, Chowringhee 296, Kalukhan Road, Boral, Square, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700154 Kolkata-69 [PAN No. AABCD 1189 R] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/ "तया"ेपक Respondent/Co-objector Shri Aloke Kr. Ghosh, Advocate आवेदक क" ओर से/By Assessee Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT- राज व क" ओर से/By Revenue DR…

SIDDHARTHA PRATAP CHAND vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

ITA/806/2005HC Delhi23 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 260ASection 7(4)

…such value is a frozen value for the purpose of Section 7(4) of the WTA and did not represent the market value as on 1st April 1981. 21. Reference was made by the ITAT to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v. ITO [1971] 82 ITR 788 (SC) where it was observed that, for the purposes of ascertainment of the fair market value on a particular date, any event prior or subsequent to the said date was wholly extraneous and irrelevant and could not be taken into consideration. The ITAT concluded that, “the frozen value of land u/s 7(4) could not be taken as market value as on 1.…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. VASAVI PRATAP CHAND

ITA/159/2005HC Delhi23 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 260ASection 7(4)

…such value is a frozen value for the purpose of Section 7(4) of the WTA and did not represent the market value as on 1st April 1981. 21. Reference was made by the ITAT to the decision of the Supreme Court in Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v. ITO [1971] 82 ITR 788 (SC) where it was observed that, for the purposes of ascertainment of the fair market value on a particular date, any event prior or subsequent to the said date was wholly extraneous and irrelevant and could not be taken into consideration. The ITAT concluded that, “the frozen value of land u/s 7(4) could not be taken as market value as on 1.…

Shekhawati General Traders Ltd. v. ITO (82 ITR 788) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax