SRI HARIRAM HOTELS P LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (III)

Appeal is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gain in the profit and loss account. Section 211 of the Companies Act contemplates, form and contents of balance sheet and profit and loss account. Sub-sections 3(A),3(B) and 3(C) of Section 211 provides that every profit and loss account and balance sheet of the company shall comply with the accounting standards, where the profit

PR COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX-6 vs. M R KODANDRAM

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Capital gains" shall be computed, by - 11 - deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

deducting the commission rate, a sum of Rs.82,75,206/- remained as unutilized capital gain. In terms of Section 54(2) of the Act, the said

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC AND ELCTRICAL

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains’. The same is computed by deducting from the full value of consideration: [a] cost incurred in connection with

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.WINTAC LTD.,

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

deducting a sum of Rs.1,21,000/- towards the sale of stock. Further, in the return of income, Rs.4.00 crores received from M/s. Recon Health Care Limited towards the non-competition fee was shown as capital receipt. The Assessing Officer treated the said amount as revenue receipt brought forward to tax, 1/3rd amount for each year. Further, the loss

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

deduction since for the purposes of Section 54 of the Act the date of purchase was to be taken as the basis namely, entering into a agreement for purchasing the new property. It also came to be held that payment made by assessee to purchase new property fully covered the consideration of capital gains

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

deduction under Section 54 and 54F in respect of long term capital gain arising from the said sale of land

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

capital gain and claimed an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- as deduction u/s. - 10 - 54EC. The balance amount of Rs.3

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

capital gain and claimed an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- as deduction u/s. - 10 - 54EC. The balance amount of Rs.3

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS. VANAJA MATTHEN

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: This Court, Questioning The Order Dated 25.01.2017 In

deduction under Section 54F of the Act for long term capital gain is allowable to investment made in residential building

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

deduction for long term capital gain and the other deduction for short term capital loss while filing their returns under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. ABB LTD

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

capital gain viz., deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer

M/S HMA DATA SYSTEM P LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

deducted from the sale value when computing capital gains tax when the actual payment accrued and was paid in the earlier

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S HMA DATA SYSTEMS P LTD.,

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

deducted from the sale value when computing capital gains tax when the actual payment accrued and was paid in the earlier

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IND SING DEVELOPERS P LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

gains, as an essential object for forming an AOP. However the CBDT Circular explaining the above insertion states that such insertion was only to take care of the claim of certain bodies that they did not fall within the definition of a ‘person’ for the sole reason, that they were not supposed to have any income or profits. Section

GOPAL S. PANDIT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

deduction u/s. 54B of the Act. For this reason also, the Date of Judgment 25-06-2018, ITA No.34/2017 Gopal S. Pandit Vs The Commissioner of Income Tax & another . 11/16 said finding of fact which is upheld by the two Appellate Authorities as well, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law arises. We quote below

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. VIKRAM REDDY

In the result, the fifth substantial question of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Capital gains" shall be computed, by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT PADMAVATHY

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO

capital gain and income from other sources. The Assessing Officer selected the returns filed by the assessee for scrutiny. The assessee has claimed deduction