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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: This Bench.

Section 45. Once 37 that be the case, the transfer of assets of the partnership to the retiring partners would amount to the transfer of capital assets in the nature of capital gains

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Section 32(1)(ii), the knowhow acquired after 1-4-1998 is a capital asset for the purpose of allowance of depreciation. In the case of assessee, the consideration of Rs.25.00 crores on sale of knowhow being the capital assets would be exigible to the tax under the head capital gain and directed the Assessing Officer to tax the said

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ASSOCIATED ELECTRONIC AND ELCTRICAL

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

gains can be sustained only if the capital asset transferred was the ‘goodwill of the business’ of the company. 20 16. The expression ‘goodwill’ has been considered and explained by the Apex Court in ‘S.C. CAMBATTA & CO., [P] LTD.,’s case [supra], wherein their Lordships having considered the Judgments of various Courts, have held as under: “6. It will thus

M/S DIFFUSION ENGINEERS LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

gains in the business or profession”. It means that Section 35AB is applicable only if the expenditure is in the nature of capital expenditure. Though the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has held that the expenditure incurred by the assessee is revenue in nature, falling under Section 37

M/S BHORUKA ENGINEERING INDS. LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

37 22. Clause (38) of Section 10 of the Income-tax Act on which reliance is placed reads as under: 10. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income falling within any of the following clauses shall not be included— ……….. ……….. (38) any income arising from the transfer of a long- term capital asset, being

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER vs. M/S OBULAPURAM MINING

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

37. (1) Any Expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described in Section 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee, laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head "Profits and gains

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S IND SING DEVELOPERS P LTD

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

section 48, the 34 fair market value of the asset on the date of such transfer shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer. The capital asset here, which was the land, could be considered as transferred to the AOP in the year in which assessee entered

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

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

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable 13 under the head, “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession”. 7. Thus, from perusal of Section 37

M/S CANARA BANK BSCA SECTION vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-11(2)

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

37. Any expenditure not being expenditure of the nature described in sections 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee, laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be - 30 - allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “Profits and gains

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

37 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under sub-section (1) of Section 131 of this Act, or a notice under sub-section (4) of Section 22 of the Indian 18 Income Tax Act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under sub-section (1) of Section 142 of this Act was issued to produce, or cause

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

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

gains of business or profession”. It is not the case of assessee that the expenditure incurred by them is covered by Sections 30 to 36 of the Act, and even if that was so the question of allowing the expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act would not arise. 18. In our opinion, the expenditure towards the religious funds

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 37 of the Act ? [ii] Whether the terms and conditions of the Agreement dated 30/10/2007 between M/S. CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. Vs. M/s. Chamundi Winery and Distillery 8/137 and DIAGEO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED amount to ‘Diversion of Income at source

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (4) vs. M/S CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 37 of the Act ? [ii] Whether the terms and conditions of the Agreement dated 30/10/2007 between M/S. CHAMUNDI WINERY AND DISTILLERY Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. Vs. M/s. Chamundi Winery and Distillery 8/137 and DIAGEO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED amount to ‘Diversion of Income at source

M/S SRI BALAJI CORPORATE SERVICES vs. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

37) in the Act from 01.04.2005 to provide specific exemption to the capital gains arising to an Individual or a HUF from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land situated in specified urban-limit subject 33 to fulfillment of certain conditions for specified urban land) 2. The RFCTLARR Act which came into effect from 1st January, 2014. in section

L. VENKATARAMANA RAJU vs. UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

37) in the Act from 01.04.2005 to provide specific exemption to the capital gains arising to an Individual or a HUF from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land situated in specified urban-limit subject 33 to fulfillment of certain conditions for specified urban land) 2. The RFCTLARR Act which came into effect from 1st January, 2014. in section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M.R.KODANDARAM

Appeals are dismissed

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

37 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Kodanda Ram 10 acres 8 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Ananda Ram 21 acres 27 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Prabhavathy 2 acres 10 guntas 5 acres 38 guntas 9 acres 12 guntas 5 acres 26 guntas 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 14.01.2008 MR Sampangiramaiah 11 acres 08.02.2008 MR Padmavathy Trust 9 acres 32 guntas 08.02.2008 3. Assessees filed returns of income

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

Appeals are dismissed

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

37 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Kodanda Ram 10 acres 8 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Ananda Ram 21 acres 27 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Prabhavathy 2 acres 10 guntas 5 acres 38 guntas 9 acres 12 guntas 5 acres 26 guntas 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 14.01.2008 MR Sampangiramaiah 11 acres 08.02.2008 MR Padmavathy Trust 9 acres 32 guntas 08.02.2008 3. Assessees filed returns of income

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M.R.ANANDARAM

Appeals are dismissed

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

37 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Kodanda Ram 10 acres 8 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Ananda Ram 21 acres 27 guntas 14.02.2007 MR Prabhavathy 2 acres 10 guntas 5 acres 38 guntas 9 acres 12 guntas 5 acres 26 guntas 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 08.02.2008 14.01.2008 MR Sampangiramaiah 11 acres 08.02.2008 MR Padmavathy Trust 9 acres 32 guntas 08.02.2008 3. Assessees filed returns of income