← All Phrases

“Section 2(45)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(45)161 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(45) is CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty (128 ITR 294), cited in 628 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(45)

CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty
128 ITR 294 · 1981 · Supreme Court
628
citing judgments

When the cost of acquisition of a capital asset cannot be determined, the computation mechanism for capital gains fails, and thus no capital gains can be charged. This establishes a broader principle that a charging section cannot operate in the absence of specific machinery provisions for computation.

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

Rama Bai v. CIT
181 ITR 400 · 1990 · Supreme Court
258
citing judgments

Interest income is taxable on either an accrual or cash basis, determined by accounting principles. This method was applicable prior to legislative changes that simplified the taxation of interest income.

CIT v. Balbir Singh Maini
398 ITR 531 · 2017 · Supreme Court
228
citing judgments

A transfer of immovable property, for the purpose of capital gains under section 2(47)(v) of the Income-tax Act, occurs only when the agreement allowing possession in part performance of a contract is a registered instrument, as mandated by Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.

CIT v. Govindbhai Mamaiya
91 Taxmann.com 20 · 2018 · Supreme Court
205
citing judgments

Interest on enhanced compensation received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the compensation, not merely interest income, and is exigible to tax on a receipt basis.

CIT v. Sohana Woollen Mills
296 ITR 238 · 2008 · High Court
180
citing judgments

A mere audit objection, by itself, is insufficient to infer that an Assessing Officer's order is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue for the purpose of initiating revisional proceedings.

Mahender Pal Narang v. CBDT
161 Taxmann.com 301 · 2024 · High Court
178
citing judgments

Interest received as enhanced compensation under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for compulsory acquisition of land is taxable as "income from other sources" under Sections 56(2)(viii) and 57(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and is not exempt under Section 10(37).

CIT v. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P Ltd.
331 ITR 192 · 2011 · High Court
152
citing judgments

The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer has taken one of two possible views on a debatable issue during assessment proceedings.

Judgments citing Section 2(45)

ITO, Ward-2(1), International Taxation, Chennai vs. Shri Ahmed Thambi, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 376/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.376/Chny/2023 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Income Tax Officer, Shri Ahamed Thambi, Ward-2(1), Vs. New No.24, Old No.18-C, International Taxation, Mayor Sivashanmugam Pillai Chennai. Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. [Pan: Ahcpr 1686A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate IjथG की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per S.R. Raghunatha, A.M : This Appeal By The Revenue Is Arising Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai [Hereinafter “Cit(A)]In Ita No.12/Cit(A)-16/2021-22, Dated 19.01.2023. The Assessment Was Framed By The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Chennai For The Assessment Year 2017-18 U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter The ‘Act’), Vide Order Dated 13.04.2021. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Sanjay Gandhi, JCIT
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

accordance with and subject to the provisions of this Act". These words, read in conjunction with definition of total income in section 2(45), imply three main things: (a)The income charged is that referred to in section 5. (b) Full effect must be given to the exemptions from