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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 45(1) of the Act, having accrued to the successor-company, the capital gains tax imposed on the successor-company as held by the Tribunal is not justifiable. 13

KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

Section 45(1) of the Act, having accrued to the successor-company, the capital gains tax imposed on the successor-company as held by the Tribunal is not justifiable. 13

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

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

capital assets of the assessment year 1988-89, relating to the gains arising on the transfer of goodwill were not liable to tax in the wake of the judicial pronouncement by the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.C.Srinivasa Setty supra. - 13 - 13. Thus, Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 13(2) of the General Clauses Act. 18. Therefore, we are of the view, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the acquisition of two residential houses by the assessee out of the capital gains

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

13. Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee for exemption of capital gains under Sections 54 and 54F of the Act as aforesaid

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

Capital Gain Account Scheme. Thus, if the above conditions are satisfied, assessee is entitled to claim benefit of the provision of Section 54. 13

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

section 12B(2) provides that the amount of a capital gain shall be computed after making certain deductions from the "full value of the consideration for which the sale, exchange or transfer of the capital asset is made". In case of a sale, the full value of the consideration is - 13

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

capital gain. There is no dispute regarding the said transaction. The saleable items were sold during financial year 2000-01 and remaining raw materials was shifted to rented warehouse while handing over the factory to HILKAL Ltd. All these raw materials are unsalable items, they 20 are toxic materials of Bulk Drug section, they are waste, have no sale value

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

gains” shall be computed, by deducting from the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset the following amounts, namely:- (i) expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with such transfer; (ii) the cost of acquisition of the asset and the cost of any improvement thereto;” 13. Section

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

13 - reassessment, if income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment by reason of their failure on the part of the assessee to make a return under Section 139 or in response to a notice issued under Section 142(1) or Section 148 of the Act or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment for that assessment

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 50D of the Act reads thus; “Fair market value deemed to be full value of consideration in certain cases. 50D. Where the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of a capital asset by an assessee is not ascertainable or cannot be determined, then, for the purpose of computing income chargeable to tax as capital gains

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

Appeal is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

13. The explanation appended to Section 115JB provides certain Items which if debited to the profit and loss account can be added back to the net profit for computing the book profit. Clause (b) of the said explanation provides for the amount carried to any reserves by whatever name called. In the present case, it is true that the capital

M/S NANDI STEELS LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the findings

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

capital gain by the Pre Press company is liable to be assessed in the hands of express company under Section 26(2) of the Act. The relevant extract of the judgment of the Supreme Court reads as under: The argument that sub-Section (2) of Section 26 read with the proviso thereto indicates that the total income of the person

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

capital gains for sale of property at Rs.10,13,45,711/- and income from other sources at Rs.3,85,142/-. The assessee ITA.No.456/2017 - 3 - acquired the property under the Will dated 24.08.1994 executed by her husband who died on 22.02.2006. Subsequently, the assessee obtained probate from the City Civil Judge, Bangalore, under the order dated 30.10.2006. The husband

M/S BHORUKA ENGINEERING INDS. LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

Section 10(38) of the Act. Therefore, they recorded a finding that it is a case of colourable device to evade payment of taxation on short-term capital gains. Therefore, the Tribunal declined to interfere with the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax. It is against the said order, the assessee is in appeal. 13

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 under Section 54EA of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in respect of sum of Rs.41,13

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains, and also disallowed 50% of expenses on transfer claimed by the assessee. Besides this, certain other disallowances were also made by the Assessing Officer. Challenging the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who granted certain relief, but confirmed the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act; the assessment

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

Section 148 of the Act reads thus: “On verification of the records, it is seen that the assessee was in receipt of an amount - 11 - of Rs.4,00,00,000/- from M/s. MTR Food Products for surrendering the trade mark right. The assessee has wrongly admitted it as income from capital gain and claimed an amount of Rs.50