BHARATHAN ANAND,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singh

2(29A), the said gains are taxed as long term capital gains. Section 47(iii) provides that where a capital

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. MANIKANDAN, CHENNAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

gains tax is leviable.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Section 45(1)", "Section 2(47)", "Section 45(3)", "Section 45(4)", "Section 9B", "Section 2(14)" ], "issues": "Whether the amount received by a partner on relinquishment of their share of goodwill due to the admission of a new partner is taxable as short-term capital

GOKULAKRISHNA,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 8(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay\napplication is dismissed

section 2(47) of the Act.\nAccordingly, the Assessing Officer treated the amount of ₹.2,38,63,452/-\nreceived from Elior India as income from short term capital gains

ACIT, LTU-2,, CHENNAI vs. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

capital gain of Rs.90,47,68,333/-. 9.2 The AO in the course of assessment is noted to have taken cognizance of the above narrated facts relating to the sale of windmill division by the assessee. According to the AO, in order to qualify as ‘slump sale’ under section 2

LATE S. YOGARATHINAM, REP. BY L/H Y. SHANMUGA DURAI,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:626/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2010-11 Shri Y. Shanmuga Durai, L/H Of Acit Late S.Yogarathinam Vs. Circle -1(2) Old No.24, No.14, Chennai. 17/24, Ramanathan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Pan: Aakpy-9845-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.03.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2025

2(47) of the Act, they would be chargeable to capital gains u/s 45 of the Act. viii) The exemption provided u/s 47(ii) is not applicable, since the combined reading of the deeds of settlement, clearly show that it is not a case of gift and provisions of Section

MAHINDRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS LTD.,CHENGALPUT vs. ITO, CHENNAI

gains\", and shall be deemed to be the\nincome of the previous year in which the transfer took place. \"Transfer\" is\ndefined in s. 2(47) and states that \"`transfer', in relation to a capital asset\nincludes the sale, exchange or relinquishment of an asset or the\nextinguishment of any rights therein or the compulsory acquisition thereof\nunder

T.L.SRITHARAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-14, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1596/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 T.L. Sritharan, The Assistant Commissioner Of New No. 13, (Old No. 1), V. Income Tax, Swaminathan Street, Non-Corporate Circle -14, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 033. [Pan: Aepps-6766-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate & Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.12.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R

section 2(47) of the Act for exchange of lands, and thus, once exchange of lands falls within the ambit of transfer as defined u/s. 2(14) of the Act, then computation of capital gains

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary

M/S. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by both the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George

47. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. In respect of insurance companies, the profit has to be computed as per the provisions contained in the First Schedule of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 44 of the Act reads as follows:- Insurance business “44. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary