T AIR 1968 SC 114, State Bank of Travelcore v. CIT, (1986) 2 SCC 11, Devsons Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

322 ITR 678Reported decision2010#7405 most cited

What is T AIR 1968 SC 114, State Bank of Travelcore v. CIT, (1986) 2 SCC 11, Devsons Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

No capital gains tax arises when shares are transferred to a wholly-owned subsidiary without consideration, as the computation mechanism for determining taxable gain fails.

15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Amiantit International Holding Ltd · 322 ITR 678 · transfer of shares · wholly owned subsidiary · without consideration · capital gains · computation mechanism · no capital gain · AAR

Judgments citing T AIR 1968 SC 114, State Bank of Travelcore v. CIT, (1986) 2 SCC 11, Devsons Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Dy Cti, CC-16(1), Mumbai vs. Shipa Shetty, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 478/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
Section 92A(2)(j)Section 92B

…ed to or received by the Assessee u/s. 5, no notional income can be brought to tax u/s. 92. In this regard, Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments:- i. Dana Corporation [2010] 321 ITR 178 (AAR) - Pg. 192 & 193 ii. Amiantit International Holding Ltd [2010] 322 ITR 678 (AAR) - Pg. 682, 683 and 692 iii. Praxair Pacific Ltd [2010] 326 ITR 276 (AAR) - Pg. 279 and 286 iv. Deere & Co [2011] 337 ITR 277 (AAR) - Pg. 280 & 284 v. Venenburg Group B.V [2007] 289 ITR 464 (AAR) - Para 15 at Pg. 472 vi. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. [2011] 334 ITR 69 (AAR) - Para 10 at Pg 78 vii. Vodafone India Services (P.) Ltd. v. Union of…

Direct Media Distribution Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT - Range -6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2211/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm M/S. Direct Media Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Distribution Ventures Pvt. Income Tax, Range-6 Ltd., Mumbai 18Th Floor, A-Wing Marathon Futurex N.M.Joshi Marg, Lower Parel Mumbai – 400 013 Pan/Gir No.Aadcd1940Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…owing cases: . PNB Finance Ltd. v. CIT 307 ITR 75 (SC) CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. 297 ITR 167 (SC) . CIT v. Official Liquidator Palai Central Bank Ltd. 150 ITR 539 (SC) Further attention is invited to the case of Amintit Interntionl Holding Ltd.. In re (322 ITR 678) wherein the Applicant had transferred shares of one 'AFIIL', an Indian Company to its wholly owned subsidiary 'ACHL', without consideration, the AAR held that since the full value of consideration was not capable of being computed, the computation mechanism failed and therefore no capital gain arose. Relevant extract of the said judgment is as u…

Shilpa Shetty, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 13, Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 5433/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Singh-Ld. DR
Section 14ASection 92ASection 92CSection 92F

…ed to or received by the Assessee u/s. 5, no notional income can be brought to tax u/s. 92. In this regard, Ld. AR relied upon the following judgments:- i. Dana Corporation [2010] 321 ITR 178 (AAR) - Pg. 192 & 193 ii. Amiantit International Holding Ltd [2010] 322 ITR 678 (AAR) - Pg. 682, 683 and 692 26 I.T.A. No. 2445/Mum/2014 Shilpa Shetty iii. Praxair Pacific Ltd [2010] 326 ITR 276 (AAR) - Pg. 279 and 286 iv. Deere & Co [2011] 337 ITR 277 (AAR) - Pg. 280 & 284 v. Venenburg Group B.V [2007] 289 ITR 464 (AAR) - Para 15 at Pg. 472 vi. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. [2011] 334 ITR 69 (AAR) - Para 10 at Pg. 78 10 Shilp…

Shilpa Shetty, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 13, Mumbai

ITA 2445/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh. R. C. Sharma, Am & Hon’Ble Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2445/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind V. SondeFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan
Section 92ASection 92A(2)(j)Section 92CSection 92F

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH. R. C. SHARMA, AM & HON’BLE SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2445/Mum/2014 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shilpa Shetty ACIT CC – 13 बिधम/ 7/D, Aditya Apartments, SVP Mumbai Nagar, Andheri(west) Pin- Vs. Mumbai-400054 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN/GIR No. ACPPS6622P (अपीलाथी/Assessee) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Assessee by : Shri Arvind V. Sonde & Shri Haresh G. Buch, AR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri V. Jenardhanan, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 05/06/2018 Date of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 21/08/2018 Date of Pron…

M.S. Lakshmi Bai, Hyderabad vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1679/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

R. Subba Laxmi, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1600/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Viswanatha Reddy Potham, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1599/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Jillela Dasaratha Reddy, Rep by Gpa Holder, J Pedda Venkata Reddy, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1598/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Khambhampati Jayalakshmi, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1587/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Rama Rao Gottumukkala, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(3), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 1233/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri J. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Kondal Rao Kurmyagari, Hyd, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-11(5), Hyd, Hyderabad

ITA 1232/HYD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri B. Ramakotaiah

For Appellant: Shri J. Suresh, ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Prasad Rao, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 2(47)(v)Section 53A

…Maini [338 ITR 531(SC)] to submit that income from capital gain on a transaction which never capitalised is at best a hypothetical income which cannot be brought to tax. He also relied on the following judgments: i. Amiantit International Holding Ltd., AAR [322 ITR 678]; ii. State Bank of Travancore Vs. CIT [158 ITR 102]; iii. CIT Vs. Ashokbhai Chimanbhai [56 ITR 42]; iv. Assam Roller Flour Mills Vs. CIT [227 ITR 43]; for various concepts. Lastly, Ld. Counsel relied on the recent amendment to the Finance Act, 2017 by which new provision of Sub-Section 5A u/s. 45 has been introduced to support the concept of re…

Videocon Oil Ventures Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 6630/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 6630/Mum/2016, (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Arvind SondeFor Respondent: Mrs. MalathiSridharan
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92CSection 95

…do not create chargeable income, cannot therefore be brought within the scope of transfer pricing provisions. Reliance is placed on circular No. 14 dated 22/11/2011. Reliance is also placed on the decision of AAR in Amiantit International Holdings Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 678 (AAR). 2. Capital financing will cover borrowing, lending or guarantee transactions. Acquisition of shares/ Share Application Money is not covered under capital financing. 3. Thus, Amount remitted as Share Application Money is a capital transaction and accordingly, provisions of section 92B are not applicable to the said remittance and in the abs…

Aditya Birla Telecom Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Comm of Income Tax 10(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 341/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Jehangir Mistri, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Kumar, Sp. Counsel
Section 143(3)Section 2Section 391Section 394Section 45Section 47

…n facts, we find that the compensation (sale consideration) of Rs. 10.20 crore was not allocable item-wise as was the case in Artex Manufacturing Co. (supra). 6. Furthermore, the authority of Advance Ruling in the case of Amiantit International Holdings Ltd., 322 ITR 678, while examining the issue of transfer of shares without consideration, held that in the absence of any definite value of consideration, the question of applicability of provisions of section 45 read with Section 48 cannot arise : “………………we have no hesitation in holding that no consideration would accrue or arise to the applicant by the transfer…

Topsgrup Electronics Systems Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 8(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10 is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2115/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Amit Shuklam/S. Topsgrup Electronic Systems Income Tax Officer-8(3)(3) Ltd. (Previsously Tops Sequipment Ltd.) Àayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 5, Royal Palms Golf & Country Club Vs. Mumbai 400020 Aarey Milk Colony, Goregaon (E) Mumbai 400065 Pan - Aaact3291K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.M. LalaFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Shah
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…action. Section 92 obviously is not intended to bring in a new head of income or to charge tax on income which is not otherwise chargeable under the Act.” 9. The learned counsel also relied upon the decision in the case of Amiantit International Holding Ltd., 322 ITR 678 (AAR) wherein it was held that in a case where income was not chargeable at all transfer pricing provisions of section 92-B(i) of the IT Act would not apply. 9.1 The learned DR, on the other hand relied upon the decision ITAT Mumbai Bench “B” in the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India Vs. DIT (Exemption), [2005] 96 ITD 263 (Mum) wherein…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gautam R. Chadha

Appeals stand disposed of

ITA - 310 / 2009HC Delhi27 Jul 2011

…the subsequent years. In this regard, he relies upon the judgments of Raja Mohan Raja Bahadur v. CIT AIR 1968 SC 114, State Bank of Travelcore v. CIT, (1986) 2 SCC 11, Devsons Pvt. Ltd v. CIT, 329 ITR 483 (Delhi), Amiantit International Holding Ltd. IN Re 322 ITR 678 (AAR), CIT v. Dinesh Kumar Goel, 331 ITR 10 (Delhi). 10. Admittedly, the assessee is following mercantile system of accounting, where under, whenever the right to receive money in the course of a trading transaction accrues or arises, even though income is not realized, income embedded in the receipt is deemed to arise or accrue as held by…