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

In the result, the findings

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

2) of section 32 or sub- section (4) of section 35, to be carried forward, effect shall first be given to the provisions of this section. (3) No loss other than the loss referred to in the proviso to subsection (1) of this section shall be carried for- ward under this 20 section for more than eight assessment years immediately

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

32 Appellant (By Sri A Shankar, Adv. for Sri V S Yogesh Kumar, Adv.)) And 1 Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2), Bangalore 82 2 Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals II, Bangalore 82 Respondents (By Sri E Sanmathi Indrakumar, Adv.) Appeal is filed under S.260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 praying to set aside the order passed

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)

32 16. Seventh Schedule to the Constitution consists of three Lists (i) Union List- only parliament can make laws (ii) State List- only state legislatures can make laws (iii) Concurrent List- both central government and state government have power to make laws. VII Schedule relates to Federal Powers like powers of Union/Central Government and the State Government bifurcated. Entry

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S C RAMAIAH REDDY

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

32,800/- as short term capital gains by invoking Section 45(2) of the Act. 3. The assessee preferred an appeal

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

32 31.05.2022 with reference to Section 148A(b), which led to the respondents passing the impugned order. It is therefore clear that the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order has to be examined in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Ashish Agarwal’s case as well as the provisions of Sections

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

32. The learned counsel for the Assessee Company, Mr. Pardiwala also relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Pokhraj Hirachand Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, [1963] 49 ITR 293. The Division Bench of Bombay High Court held that the expression ‘thereon’ occurring in Section 33(4) of the 1922 Act means ‘on the subject

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

2) applies and the Income-tax Officer must take into account the full value of the consideration for the transfer. Fourthly, a related objection has been raised in Para 9 of your letter dated 02.06.2014. You have stated that, “full value of consideration cannot be construed as having a reference to the market value of the asset transferred.”” 12. Learned

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

32(1)(ii) of the Act, it is a capital asset for the purpose of depreciation and exigible to tax under the capital gain. Sri.Thirumalesh relied upon the judgments reported in (2011) 237 CTR 227 (Madras) in the case of INDO TECH ELECTRIC COMPANY v/s DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX and (2011) 337 ITR 178 (Delhi) in the case

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

2) applies and the Income-tax Officer must take into account the full value of the consideration for the transfer. Fourthly, a related objection has been raised in Para 9 of your letter dated 02.06.2014. You have stated that, “full value of consideration cannot be construed as having a reference to the market value of the asset transferred.”” 14. Learned

M/S. KARNATAKA INSTRADE CORPORATION LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

capital gain earned by selling of the cement factory was assessed for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2006-07. The department has accepted the same. However, the Tribunal disallowed the said 23 expenditure holding that the assessee had closed the business in the year 1995 itself and no document has been shown that they had incurred any expenditure during

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

Appeal is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gain should be included for the purpose of computing Book Profit under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3 3. Facts in brief are: The appellant/company was incorporated on 3.2.1992 with an object to commence business of running a hotel. It transpires that for this purpose, it had purchased a land measuring 2 acres 32

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S.KURUHINSHETTY URBAN CO- OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. 16 Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE MERCANTILE CO-OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI SHIVABODHARANGA URBAN CO-OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE MERCANTILE CO-OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI MAHATAMA BASAVESHWARA

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. THE ATHANI CO-OPERATIVE

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI BRAMHANATH CREDIT SOUHARD

In the result, the above questions are answered in favour

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,S.SUJATHA

gains of business attributable to any one or more of such activities. Section 80P(4) which came to be introduced in the statute by the Finance Act, 2006, with effect from 1.4.2007, reads as under: 80P(4) The provisions of this section shall not apply in relation to any co-operative bank other than a primary agricultural credit society