← All Phrases

“Section 2(24)(iii)”

Section References (mined)Section 2Section 2(24)(iii)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 2(24)(iii) is Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT (263 ITR 143), cited in 181 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 2(24)(iii)

Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT
263 ITR 143 · 2003 · Supreme Court
181
citing judgments

Income derived from letting out property along with incidental use of furniture, fixtures, and common facilities is assessable as 'income from house property' and not 'business income' when the prime object is merely to let out and not to exploit the property as a business asset.

CIT v. Mythreyi Pai
152 ITR 247 · 1985 · High Court
44
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred towards the purchase of shares is a capital expenditure and therefore, interest expenditure incurred on such purchases is not eligible for deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.

79 Taxman 378/216 ITR 548 (Bom.) 4. CIT v. Macbrout Engineering (P.) Ltd.
52 Taxmann.com 219 · 2014 · High Court
43
citing judgments

If the Revenue accepts the Tribunal's decision for earlier years without challenge, it cannot assail the same decision in subsequent years, provided the facts are similar.

H.E.H. Nizam’s Religious Endowment Trust v. CIT
59 ITR 582 · 1966 · Supreme Court
30
citing judgments

For income to be exempt under Section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, it must be 'actually applied' for charitable or religious purposes; notional expenditure does not qualify. The burden of proving exemption lies with the assessee.

24 SOT 1(Del) Baid Credit & Portfolio (P) Ltd. v. ITO
325 ITR 588 · 2010 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Surplus arising on the sale of agricultural land is exempt from capital gains tax if it does not fall within the definition of 'capital asset' under section 2(14)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Charanjiv Charitable Trust
267 CTR 305 · 2014 · High Court
19
citing judgments

A charitable trust cannot claim depreciation on an asset if its entire cost has already been allowed as a deduction by way of application of income.

Arthur Anderson & Co. v. ACIT
324 ITR 240 · 2010 · High Court
19
citing judgments

Allowing deduction of interest paid by the assessee as business expenditure u/s.37(1) of the Act is not permissible when netting off interest received against interest paid.

ALP. (iii) Manugraph India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT
62 Taxmann.com 347 · 2015 · Reported
18
citing judgments

The Tribunal treats a corporate guarantee as an international transaction under Section 92B, upholding an Arm's Length Price (ALP) of 0.50% for the guarantee fee.

Judgments citing Section 2(24)(iii)