KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

3) of the Act read with Section 147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2000-01 and tax liability on the capital gains of Rs.1,33,43,710/- to the extent of Rs.51,37,329/- and with interest under Sections 234A and 234B

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

3) of the Act and artificially split the transaction into two and brought to tax the difference between the market value of shares on the date of exercise and the exercise price as 'income from salary' and the difference between the sale price of shares and market value of shares on the date of exercise of 'income from short term

M/S SANKHLA POLYMERS (P) LTD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2)

In the result, the appeal relating to the assessment

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

capital gains was concerned, it was held to be at 20%, as laid down in the judgment of this court in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax vs M/s United Breweries Ltd [ITA No 508 of 2001, decided on 26-11-2007] and therefore submits that this analogy in respect of an exempted income of an 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 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstance of the case." 3. The brief facts are that the assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2005–06. In the said return, the assessee did not disclose the capital gains

M/S KARLE INTERNATIOAL PRIVATE LTD vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the order of the income tax appellate tribunal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

234B and 234D of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case? 2. Facts leading to filing of this appeal briefly stated are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacture and 4 export of readymade garments. The assessee for the Assessment year 2008-09 filed the return of income declaring total

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

234B. 73. The CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) dated 11.4.1955 states to the effect that it is the duty of the assessing officer to make available to the assessee any legitimate and legal tax relief to which the assessee is entitled, but has omitted to claim for one reason or another. Merely because the assessee in the return filed

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

234B. 73. The CBDT Circular No. 14 (XL-35) dated 11.4.1955 states to the effect that it is the duty of the assessing officer to make available to the assessee any legitimate and legal tax relief to which the assessee is entitled, but has omitted to claim for one reason or another. Merely because the assessee in the return filed

M/S GAONKAR MINES vs. THE ADDL COMMISSIONER

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

234B or, as the case may be, section 234C can be considered, are as follows: (a) Where during the course of proceedings for search and seizure under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, or otherwise, the books of account and other incriminating documents have been seized, and the assessee has been unable to furnish the return of income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

gains. (iii) While going through your balance sheet, I find that so called sale of diamonds were not realised by - 14 - you during the relevant previous year. You are requested to furnish copies of your bank accounts in which the sale proceeds of the diamonds were actually received by you. I will also request you to furnish Permanent Account Number

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

gains. (iii) While going through your balance sheet, I find that so called sale of diamonds were not realised by - 14 - you during the relevant previous year. You are requested to furnish copies of your bank accounts in which the sale proceeds of the diamonds were actually received by you. I will also request you to furnish Permanent Account Number

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

gains. (iii) While going through your balance sheet, I find that so called sale of diamonds were not realised by - 14 - you during the relevant previous year. You are requested to furnish copies of your bank accounts in which the sale proceeds of the diamonds were actually received by you. I will also request you to furnish Permanent Account Number

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

gains. (iii) While going through your balance sheet, I find that so called sale of diamonds were not realised by - 14 - you during the relevant previous year. You are requested to furnish copies of your bank accounts in which the sale proceeds of the diamonds were actually received by you. I will also request you to furnish Permanent Account Number

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.PARVATHI MADHAVA

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

gains. (iii) While going through your balance sheet, I find that so called sale of diamonds were not realised by - 14 - you during the relevant previous year. You are requested to furnish copies of your bank accounts in which the sale proceeds of the diamonds were actually received by you. I will also request you to furnish Permanent Account Number

M/S CANBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

Section 143(1) of the Act was levied at Date of Order 21-08-2017 in W.P.No.7276/2017 M/s.Canbank Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. 3/13 Rs.20,12,466/-. A waiver application was filed by the petitioner-assessee before the Chief Commissioner. 3. The facts leading to the said partial waiver as narrated in the impugned order