← All Phrases

“Section 75(1)”

Section References (mined)Section 75Section 75(1)9 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 75(1) is Smt Dayawanti v. CIT (75 Taxmann.com 308), cited in 131 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 75(1)

Smt Dayawanti v. CIT
75 Taxmann.com 308 · 2016 · High Court
131
citing judgments

Additions to income based on statements recorded under section 132(4) during a search are valid, and such statements possess evidentiary value even if later retracted. Assessments made under section 153A, relying on these statements, are valid if completed within the prescribed time limits.

R.B. Jessaram Fatehchand (Sugar Dept.) v. CIT
75 ITR 33 · 1970 · High Court
63
citing judgments

The mere absence of customer addresses, particularly for cash sales, in the books of account is not a sufficient ground to reject the books or to cast suspicion on the genuineness of the transactions.

Income Tax Vs. India Discount Co. Ltd. 75 ITR 191 (SC), Commissioner of Income Tax v. Provincial Farmers (P) Ltd.
245 ITR 421 · 2000 · Supreme Court
55
citing judgments

The entry in the books of accounts is not determinative of the true nature of a transaction for income tax purposes; the substance of the transaction, rather than its accounting treatment, governs its taxability and deductibility.

R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spg. Wvg. Mills v. CIT
75 ITR 260 · 1970 · High Court
32
citing judgments

The Assessing Officer must record a specific finding that the method of accounting adopted by the assessee is unacceptable or that the accounts are irregular before rejecting them. Mere high percentage of dead loss in a spinning mill does not automatically lead to an inference of suppressed production or justify an addition by way of estimate if record-keeping of wastage is not feasible.

315 (Mumbai- Trib.) Ms. Chhaya P. Gangar v. Deputy 75-95 Commissioner of Income-tax 10
88 Taxmann.com 700 · 2017 · High Court
26
citing judgments

The judgment addresses situations where the assessing officer's findings might be contradictory, particularly when relying on sales based on books that have already been rejected.

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. DCIT
353 ITR 474 · High Court
22
citing judgments

When considering a deduction claim under Section 80HHC, the provisions of Section 80IA(9) must be applied. The formation of the Assessing Officer's belief for issuing a notice is subject to judicial review based on whether there was relevant material for a reasonable person to form that belief.

CIT v. Madan Teatres Ltd.
260 CTR 75 · 2013 · High Court
12
citing judgments

Penalty cannot be imposed when the addition to income is solely on account of the valuation officer's estimation of fair market value.

Ambuja Cements Limited. (i) PCIT v. Rashmi Metaliks Ltd.
444 ITR 75 · Reported
11
citing judgments

The case is cited for the proposition that deduction under Section 80IA(4) is available for infrastructure facilities that serve a public purpose.

Judgments citing Section 75(1)

M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Dharmapuri vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Hosur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3243/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2913/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Salem. Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Tamil Nadu 636 903. [Pan:Aabck1431D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3243/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Circle I, Salem. Tamil Nadu 636 903. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Murali, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Salem, Dated 01.03.2018 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

shares be shown as asset in the balance 10 I.T.A. Nos.2913/Chny/18 & 3243/Chny/19 sheet of the company. The A.O. further held that as per section 75(1) of companies Act, 1956 the shares of the company can be allotted either for cash or for consideration other than cash. Before

Thirumagal Alloys Pvt. Ltd., Harur vs. ACIT Circle 1, Hosur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2913/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2913/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Salem. Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Tamil Nadu 636 903. [Pan:Aabck1431D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3243/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 M/S. Thirumagal Alloys Pvt Ltd., Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of No. 5/95, Cmelbatchhapet, Income Tax, Sennimalai Gardens, Harur, Circle I, Salem. Tamil Nadu 636 903. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Murali, Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 12.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao,: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Salem, Dated 01.03.2018 Passed Under Section 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

For Appellant: Shri T. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M. Murali, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

shares be shown as asset in the balance 10 I.T.A. Nos.2913/Chny/18 & 3243/Chny/19 sheet of the company. The A.O. further held that as per section 75(1) of companies Act, 1956 the shares of the company can be allotted either for cash or for consideration other than cash. Before