PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. M/S JEANS KNIT PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find any

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

capital gain earned. It is urged that since, the tribunal has failed to determine the core issue with regard to colorable devise adopted by the 15 assessee, to evade tax, therefore, the matter be remitted to the tribunal for decision afresh in accordance with law. In support of aforesaid submissions, the reliance is placed on decision of Supreme Court

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

capital gains earned thereon had not been declared for tax. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.5,25,000/- was brought to tax. 15. Further at paragraph 8 of the order relating to bogus transportation expenses claimed for the assessment years 2009- 10 and 2010-11, the assessing officer has brought on record that the appellant has claimed transportation expenses

SATISH KUMAR PANDEY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

34,800 shares. They entered into an Agreement with KPMG2 and Khaitan & Co. Advocates in connection with transfer of the aforesaid shares to M/s MAN Diesel & Turbo SE, a Company incorporated in Germany for a consideration of Rs. 58 Crores. 4. The AO3 noted that the selling expenses was not incurred wholly and exclusively in connection with the transfer

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

capital gains earned thereon had not been declared for tax. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.5,25,000/- was brought to tax. 14.Further at paragraph 8 of the order relating to bogus transportation expenses claimed for the assessment years 2009- 10 and 2010-11, the assessing officer has brought on record that the appellant has claimed transportation expenses for the years

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

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

capital gains tax, etc., the official figure should be lesser. In a sense, to that extent, it is a case of tax avoidance which is culpable both legally and morally. One cannot gainfully argue that it is a case of tax planning, intent being corrupt. However, that has been done at the instance of the 1st defendant, at whose hands

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

capital gains, was not available. 3. The assessee controverted the said contention and had asserted that all conditions as specified in Section 47 (xiii) of the Act were duly complied with. And, appealed the re-assessment order. However, the CIT(A) had rejected the assessee's appeal. This led the assessee to file an appeal before the learned ITAT

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SWETHA REALMART LLP

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

capital gain amounting to Rs.16,34,94,975/- by observing that description of the property given in both partnership deed and sale deed, it is established that property in question was not only vacant land but also had constructed building which was shown in Schedule of assets under Land and Building”?” 3. Having heard the learned Panel Counsel appearing

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BANGALORE INTERNATIONAL

Appeal is dismissed; and

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,UMESH M ADIGA

Section 43A with effect from 01.04.2003 and upheld CIT(A)'s order that the gain arising on 3 (312 ITR 254) Para 30 to 34 - 6 - ITA No. 329 of 2017 account of exchange fluctuation are not liable to tax as it is on the capital

THE COMMISSIONER vs. M/S CANARA BANK

In the result, we do not find merit in these

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

capital gains on sale of such assets? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in setting aside that the 5 provisions of Section 115JB are not applicable to banking companies as no accounts are drawn up as per the requirement of Schedule VI of the Companies

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CANARA BANK

In the result, the appeals are dismissed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 45(2) and also that the Bank had no working regarding deprecated value of assets and capital gains on sale of such assets?’ 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the first substantial question of law is covered by the decision of this Court in ITA No.97/2010 and connected matter dated 17.01.2020 and the second substantial question

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S URBAN LADDER HOME DECOR SOLUTIONS PVT LTD

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: V KAMESWAR RAO,S RACHAIAH

gains derived from the alienation of any such right or property which are contingent on the productivity, use, or disposition thereof ; and (b) payments of any kind received as consideration for the use of, or the right to use, any industrial, commercial, or scientific equipment, other than payments derived by an enterprise described in paragraph 1 of Article 8 (Shipping

SHRI. SHANKARLAL GILADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,

Bench: G.NARENDAR,M.NAGAPRASANNA

gains from business and profession”. What happens is that, in the process, when the shares are held as “stock-in-trade”, certain dividend is also earned, though incidentally, which is also an income. However, by virtue of Section 10(34) of the Act, this dividend income is not to be included in the total income and is exempt from

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

gains of business or profession. Explanation. - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that any expenditure incurred by an assessee for any purpose which is an offense or which is prohibited by law shall not be deemed to have been incurred for the purposes of business or profession and no deductions or allowance shall be made in respect