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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

PROF. P.N. SHETTY vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: The

gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house. (1) … (2) … (3) … (4) The amount of the net consideration which is not appropriated by the assessee towards the purchase of the new asset made within one year before the date on which the transfer of the original asset took place

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

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

capital gains. v) If there was no AOP what was the date of transfer of subject property to M/s. Parkway Developments Pvt. Ltd., ie, whether such transfer was a) AT the time of MOU? b) At the time of principle agreement? c) At the time of settlement deed? 4 d) At the time of execution of conveyance deed? 17. Taking

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. ELECTRONICS AND CONTROLS

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,E.S.INDIRESH

4 - unsuccessfully. On further appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal, the same came to be allowed setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] directing the Assessing Officer to allow the carry forward of losses to future years. Being aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred this appeal. 5. Learned counsel Sri.K.V.Aravind appearing for the Revenue inviting

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED

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

gain and the other deduction for short term capital loss while filing their returns under Section 139 of the Act. All was well up to September, 2015. The Department conducted search on all the petitioners herein under Section 132 of the Act. Section 132 of the Act reads as follows: “132. Search and seizure.—(1) [Where the [Principal Director General

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

gain towards the transaction of transfer of part of its rights in the capital assets of trademark. Reasons recorded by the learned Assessing Officer for the notice dated 03.03.2015 under Section 148 of the Act impugned herein, is verbatim similar to that of the reasons recorded in the first notice dated 03.03.2015 issued under Section

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

gain towards the transaction of transfer of part of its rights in the capital assets of trademark. Reasons recorded by the learned Assessing Officer for the notice dated 03.03.2015 under Section 148 of the Act impugned herein, is verbatim similar to that of the reasons recorded in the first notice dated 03.03.2015 issued under Section

GOPAL S. PANDIT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

4[5], Pune’, decided on 30.03.2012. However, learned Counsel was not having the original Manual of Office Procedure for our perusal. 6. Section 153D of the Act relevant for our purposes is quoted below for ready reference: “153D.: Prior approval necessary for assessment in cases of search or requisition. No order of assessment or reassessment shall be passed

M/S. THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

4. Being aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed by the assessee before the Tribunal which - 6 - came to be dismissed. Hence, the assessee has preferred this appeal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/assessee submitted that the denial of set-off of carry forward of loss relying on Section 80 of the Act by all the authorities

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GMR HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

gains” (whether relating to short-term Date of Judgment 31-07-2018 I.T.A.No.58/2012 Commissioner of Income-tax & Anr. vs. M/s. GMR Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 7/16 capital assets or any other capital assets).” In view of the above, we are of the considered view that the second objection of the AO in the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment

MASTER BALACHANDAR KRISHNAN vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,RAVI V HOSMANI

Section 8 of the Act provides for the authorities of the School which are five in number. Section 18 of the Act which deals with authorities and Officers of the School etc., states that the authorities of the School and their composition, powers, functions and other matters relating to them, the officers of the School and their appointment, powers, functions

SMT PRAMEELA KRISHNA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: That, To M/S.S.I. Property Development Limited & Therefore, The Return Filed By The Assessee After A Delay Of Almost 2½ Years, Cannot Be Accepted.

gains arise was not filed within the due date under Section 139(1) or under Section 139(4) of the Act. It is only after the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 to bring to tax assessee’s income from family pension, income from house property and capital

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. CORPORATION BANK

Bench: That, To M/S.S.I. Property Development Limited & Therefore, The Return Filed By The Assessee After A Delay Of Almost 2½ Years, Cannot Be Accepted.

gains arise was not filed within the due date under Section 139(1) or under Section 139(4) of the Act. It is only after the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 to bring to tax assessee’s income from family pension, income from house property and capital

AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

capital gain arising from the sale of Wipro shares, the A.O. was made fully aware of the sale price of Wipro shares. In any event, the market price of Wipro shares was completely in the public realm as it is a very well known and widely traded shares. Further, during the course of the 5 scrutiny assessment, the A.O specifically

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. BAGMANE DEVELOPERS PVT LTD

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

capital gain’ instead of ‘business income’ even when the assessee had earlier claimed the sale of land as part of ‘business income’ and claimed deduction under Section 80 IA (4) of the Income Tax Act while furnishing the returns of the income under Section 139