THE COMMR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S DYNAMIC ENTERPRISE

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: This Bench.

2(47) of the I.T.Act. Accordingly, notice under Section 148 was issued on 27.03.2002. In reply to the said notice, the assessee-firm contended that it has paid the amount to the retiring partners standing on credit side in respect of capital accounts. There is no transfer of asset and therefore, they are not liable to pay any capital gains

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 2 (47) of the Act, there is no capital gains. They also contended that they have disclosed fully and truly

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

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE UNION OF INDIA REPTD BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri W.P. No.26037/2005 C/W W.P.No.4464/2007 & W.P.No.27087/2005(It)

47 differentia must have a rational relation with the object sought to be achieved by the legislation. It is difficult to expect the Legislature carving out a classification which may be scientifically perfect or logically complete or which may satisfy the expectations of all concerned still the Court would respect the classification dictated by the wisdom of legislature and shall

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI DINESH D RANKA

The appeal is allowed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

Section 2(47) of the Act and therefore the Appellate Commissioner held that the capital gains have arisen to the assessee

SHRI N G CHANDRA REDDY (HUF) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act. Accordingly, capital gains were computed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7442-DB ITA No. 637 of 2016 3.3 Aggrieved

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

capital gains of Rs.2,23,47,434/- earned by the assessee from sale of original asset, a sum of Rs.1.00 Crore invested in purchase of the new asset that stands in the name of assessee’s wife and a sum of Rs.25.00 lakhs invested in REC bonds regarding eligibility of 15 Rs.60 lakhs and Rs.90 lakhs under Section 54 requires

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

47 by the petitioner, the Assessing officer consciously chose not to apply Section 56(2)(vii)(c) of the I.T.Act. However, after the expiry of the period of four years mentioned in the proviso to Section 147, the A.O has attempted to take a new view, which is not permissible in law. 26. It is well settled that

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

gains arising to such shareholder or the holder of other specified securities, as the case may be, in the year in which such shares or other specified securities were purchased by the company. Explanation: For the purposes of this section, “specified securities” shall have the meaning assigned to it in Explanation to section 77A of the Companies

LAHAR SINGH SIROYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

2(47) of the Act, we are of the view that the appellants were entitled to relief under section 54 of the Act, in respect of the long-term capital gain

CHITTHARANJAN A DASANNACHARYA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-V

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

gains' as claimed by the Appellant? ii. The Hon'ble Tribunal was correct in holding that stock options did not constitute a 'capital asset' under Section 2(14) of the Act? iii. The Hon'ble Tribunal was right in concluding that cashless exercise of stock options does not constitute transfer of a long term capital asset under Section 2(47

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.BHUWALKA STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR

Section 2(47) of the Act for the purpose of levying capital gains tax. 13. Both learned counsel for the revenue

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

2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that while computing the capital gain arising on transfer of Capital Assets which was acquired by the assessee under a Will, the indexed cost of acquisition has to be computed with reference to the year in which the previous

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. INTEL CAPITAL (CAYMAN) CORPORATION

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that assessee is a non-resident company. The company filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2008-09 by declaring a total income of `49,95,03,232/-. In the assessment proceedings under Section 143(3) read with Section 144C of the Act, the Assessing Authority, vide order

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S AMCO BATTERIES LTD.,

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 2(47) of the Act liable for capital gains was not disclosed by the assessee and recorded a perverse

V.S. CHANDRASHEKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the first substantial question of law is

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 2(47) of the Act. In this connection, reliance has been placed on decisions of the Supreme Court in 'SANJEEV LAL VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH', 365 ITR 389 and therefore, the consideration has rightly been subjected to capital gains

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.KODANDARAM

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.PRABHAVATHY

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

Section 143(3) of the Act and 1 Assessment Year I.T.A Nos.176/2015, 520/2014, 175/2015, 177/2015, 178/2015, 179/2015, 298/2015 10 added taxes against each assessee, as shown herein below, on the ground that the lands sold by them are capital assets and the capital gains arising on the said assets are chargeable to tax: Assessee Original return of income Revised return