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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

v) of section 47 shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the said clauses, be deemed to be income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" of the previous year in which such transfer took place.] (2

KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

v) of section 47 shall, notwithstanding anything contained in the said clauses, be deemed to be income chargeable under the head "Capital gains" of the previous year in which such transfer took place.] (2

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

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: This Bench.

V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) AND: M/s DYNAMIC ENTERPRISES 38/3, BLOCK – 2 SRI LAKSHMI INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX 2 HOSUR MAIN ROAD, GARVEBHAVI PALYA BOMMANAHALLI, MADIVALA POST BANGALORE – 560068 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI G.SARANGAN, SR. COUNSEL FOR SRI K.S.RAMABADRAN, ADVOCATE) THIS ITA IS FILED 260-A OF I.T.ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OR ORDER DATED 02.03.2006 PASSED IN ITA No.1295/BANG/2004, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

V ARAVIND, ADV.) AND: M/S. SHASTHA PHARMA LABORATORIES, NO.16/2, OVH ROAD, BANGALORE. ...RESPONDENT. (BY SRI S. PARTHASARATHI, ADV.) THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SEC.260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 22-09- 2006 PASSED IN ITA NO.1481/BNG/2003, FOR THE - 2 - ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93, PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: I. FORMULATE

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

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

SMT.K.SHASHIKALA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

In the result, I pass the following:

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar Writ Petition No.22748/2021 (T - It)

Section 2(47)(v) of the IT Act, thereby, calling upon the petitioner to pay capital gains tax on the amount

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

v) Any distribution of shares pursuant to a demerger by the resulting company to the shareholders of the demerged company (whether) or not there is a reduction of capital in the demerged company.” 36. He also drew our attention to Section 46-A of the Act which provides for “Levy of capital gains on purchase by the Company

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

v M J Sivani (2014) 46 taxmann.com 170 (Karnataka), for denying exemption under section 54F, is perverse and contrary to law? 4 2. The assessee, a salaried person working in M/s IGUS India Private Limited, had filed a return of income showing the capital gains for the assessment year under consideration. CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE: 3. During the relevant assessment

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

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

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

V) and Section 2(47)(VI) of the Act and therefore, it is a case of non disclosure. 5. It is also argued that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer prima facie establish a statement of tax and at the stage of recording reasons, the Assessing Officer is not required to establish a statement of tax with evidence

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

V Javali, learned counsel for respondent-assessee. 9. Submission of Sri G Kamaladhar is that there was transfer of the assets of the erstwhile company to the assessee-company and therefore it is hit by the provisions of clause-(ii) of sub-section (2) of Section 80-I of the Act. Alternative submission is that the assessee company cannot claim

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

v) or clause (vi) or clause (via) or clause (viaa) or clause (viab) or clause (vib) or clause (vic) or clause (vica) or clause (vicb) or clause (vicc) or clause (xiii) or clause (xiiib) or clause (xiv) of section 47. (iv) such assessee being a Hindu undivided family, by the mode referred to in sub-section (2) of section

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

In the result, the first substantial question of law is

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

47) of the Act uses the expression 'immovable property', whereas, Section 50C does not use the expression immovable property and therefore, the legislature has used the term 'land' instead of 7 'immovable property'. It is also pointed out that wherever the legislature intended, it has expanded the meaning of the land to improve rights or interest in land

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. VIKRAM REDDY

In the result, the fifth substantial question of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

2(47), 45(3), and relevant extracts of 47(xiii) Section 48 and 49(1)(e) read as under: (47) "transfer", in relation to a capital asset, includes,— (i) the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset ; or (ii) the extinguishment of any rights therein ; or 45 Capital Gains. (3) The profits or gains arising from the transfer

SATISH N vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Raghvendra S. Chauhan

47. This takes us to the very concept of "lead generator". This is a term borrowed from marketing. Lead generation is the initiation of consumer interest, or inquiry into services or a business. The method of generating leads typically falls under the umbrella of advertising, but may also include other methods. Leads may come from various sources or activities

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.GAYATHRI ENTERPRISES

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

2[47] of the Act, history of clause [6] of sub-section [ii] to Section 47 of the Act coming on to the statute book on 1.4.1987 changes brought about by the Finance Act, 1987 and also the change of legal position on and after 1.4.1992 in the provisions of sections 182, 183 and 184 of the Act which

M/S WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

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