THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SHASTHA PHARMA LABORATORIES

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

11 - the Act. In the returns categorically it is mentioned that the assets and the liabilities of the firm were taken over by the assessee as a going concern, after the other partners retired and no capital gains is payable as there was no transfer which comes within the purview of Section 2(47) of the Act. Therefore, the initiation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRAKASH ELECTRIC COMPANY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

4) Where any of the conditions laid down in the proviso to clause (xiiib) of section 47 are not complied with, the amount of profits or gains arising from the transfer of such capital asset or intangible asset or share or shares not charged under section 45 by virtue of conditions laid down in the said proviso shall be deemed

KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

4) Where any of the conditions laid down in the proviso to clause (xiiib) of section 47 are not complied with, the amount of profits or gains arising from the transfer of such capital asset or intangible asset or share or shares not charged under section 45 by virtue of conditions laid down in the said proviso shall be deemed

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

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

11. The judicial pronouncement on the aspect of slump sale would indicate that the said slump sale would not be taxable neither as business income under Section 41[2] nor under Section 45 of the Act. In the case B.C.Srinivasa Setty Supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the charging section and computation section are integrated code

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with section 30 to section 43C. That, section 32(1) of the Act provides for depreciation in respect of building, plant and machinery owned by the assessee and used for the business purposes. It further provides for deduction subject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

4. The appellant sold a residential house at Angamaly, Kerala i.e., House property in favour of M/s. Fashion Jewellery for Rs.2.42 Crores vide sale deed registered on 08.10.2012. Capital gains amounting to Rs.2,23,47,434/- was claimed as an exemption under Section 54 of the Act and Rs.25 Lakhs is claimed as an exemption for making investment

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT SAROJINI M KUSHE

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

4) of section 45, the amount - 9 - chargeable to income-tax as income of such specified entity under that sub-section which is attributable to the capital asset being transferred by the specified entity, calculated in the prescribed manner: Provided…………….” 10. On combined reading of these provisions, any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset with

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

4) of section 45, the amount chargeable to income-tax as income of such specified entity under that sub-section which is attributable to the capital asset being transferred by the specified entity, calculated in the prescribed manner: Provided…………….” 12. On combined reading of these provisions, any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset with

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

4. The substantial questions of law, which arise for consideration in these appeals, are as under: 1. Whether the Tribunal committed an error in holding that the assessee would be entitled to claim exemption under Section 54 of the Act in respect of two separate residential houses acquired out of the capital gains, when the Section contemplates exemption in respect

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

4. Being aggrieved by the same, assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Appellate authority held that there has been non-compliance of provision i.e., Section 54 of the Act and as such, assessee would not be entitled to claim deduction. Consequently, appeal filed by the assessee came to be rejected by affirming the order

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

4. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that for the computation of capital gains arising on sale of equity shares of M/s.Recon Agro Tech Pvt Ltd., the loss under capital gains is to be computed by adopting cost of acquisition of Rs.0.10 per share when interse parties were interested persons and family members and the entire transaction

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

4. The learned Counsel would vehemently contend that the Tribunal wrongly interpreting the relevant provisions of the Act, reversed the findings of the Authorities while determining the assessment of income to capital gains. It is further contended that, no doubt, sub-section [2] of section 55 of the Act was amended with effect from 1.4.2002 by inserting the words

COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX vs. OHIO UNIVERSITY CHRIST COLLEGE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

4) is not intended to explain how the accounts of the business undertaking should be maintained. It is intended only to bring Date of Judgment: 17.07.2018 in ITA Nos.312 & 313 of 2016 Commissioner of Income-tax & another vs. Ohio University Christ College 38/47 to tax the excess income computed under the provisions of the Act in respect of business undertaking

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. BASAVESHWAR CO-OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of any business of banking (including providing credit facilities) carried on by a co- operative society. Reference was made to the Explanation appended to Section 80 P (4) - which lays down that a co-operative bank and a primary agricultural credit society, shall have the same meaning assigned to them in Part V of the Banking Regulation

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.KURUHINSHETTY URBAN CO- OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

11, and after claiming deduction under Section 80 P(2) (a) (i) of the IT Act, the total income was declared as 'nil'. For the assessment year 2010-11, as well, the respondent had declared 'nil' income after claiming deduction under Section 80 P (2) (a) (i) of the IT Act, at 100%. 3 The Assessing Officer had however, opined

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MINORITY CREDIT CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD.,

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of any business of banking (including providing credit facilities) carried on by a co- operative society. Reference was made to the Explanation appended to Section 80 P (4) - which lays down that a co-operative bank and a primary agricultural credit society, shall have the same meaning assigned to them in Part V of the Banking Regulation

JAI JINENDRA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMIT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of any business of banking (including providing credit facilities) carried on by a co- operative society. Reference was made to the Explanation appended to Section 80 P (4) - which lays down that a co-operative bank and a primary agricultural credit society, shall have the same meaning assigned to them in Part V of the Banking Regulation

VIJAYALAXMI CO -OPERATIVE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of any business of banking (including providing credit facilities) carried on by a co- operative society. Reference was made to the Explanation appended to Section 80 P (4) - which lays down that a co-operative bank and a primary agricultural credit society, shall have the same meaning assigned to them in Part V of the Banking Regulation