KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

capital gains tax under Section 45(1) of the Act, having accrued to the successor-company, the capital gains tax imposed

SRI. P S SESHADRI. vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, this petition is allowed in part

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

Section 54EC as it stood prior to its substitution by Finance Act 2007 was without any limit over the ‘capital gain’ investment in capital gains bonds for exemption under Sec. 54EC, from capital gain tax under Sec. 45

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

capital assets on the - 20 - dissolution of the firm. Section 45 (4) of the Act reads as under:- “Section 45 (4): The profits or gains

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

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

45 of the Act. In the case B.C.Srinivasa Setty Supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the charging section and computation section are integrated code and if one fails, other fails. Thus, it was held that the gain from the transfer of a bundle of asset on a slump basis is not - 12 - chargeable to capital

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains’. Section 45[1] of the Act reads as under: “45. Capital Gains: (1) Any profits or gains arising

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 45 of the Act. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of this case, we answer the first substantial question of law raised in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Substantial question of law No.2: 19. The argument of the Revenue was that, once the assessee purchased the residential house, the remaining unutilized capital gain

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

Section 45 of the Act reads thus: “Capital gains. 45. (1) Any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

capital gain shall not be charged under section 45 ; (b) xxxxxx Provided that nothing contained in this sub- section shall

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

capital gain and the cost of the new asset shall be charged under section 45 as the income of the previous

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

Section 45 of the Act reads thus: “Capital gains. 45. (1) Any profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital

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

45 of the Act. However, if the cost of the new asset is less than the net consideration in respect of the original asset, so much of the capital gain as bears to be whole of the capital gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration shall not be charged under section

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

Gain’. The judgment relied upon by Sri.Ramabhadran reported in CIT v/s VAZIR SULTAN TOBACOO COMPANY LIMITED is not applicable to the facts of the present case. In that case, the compensation has been paid for termination of 44 agency agreement which would be a capital receipt, whereas in the present case, there is a transfer of knowhow. The Madras High

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

section 45(2) [relating to capital gains] and section 55(2)(b) [relating to cost of acquisition]. 30 Section 45

PROF. P.N. SHETTY vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: The

gains to tax as per sub-section (4) of Section 54F of the said Act. The effect of the impugned notice was that the unutilized amount (Rs.1,15,00,000/- minus Rs.21,32,470/-) after the expiry of three years from the date of transfer of the original capital asset was proposed to be subjected to tax under Section 45

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

In the result, the findings

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

capital gains cannot be shifted from income. It is also urged that the case of the assessee is 14 not of stock in trade but the assets of the assessee are fixed assets and not in stock in trade, therefore, the reliance placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in COCANADA RADHASWAMI BANK LTD. SUPRA has no application

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. VIKRAM REDDY

In the result, the fifth substantial question of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

capital gains of Rs.222,26,14,953/- was taxed under Section 45 read with Section 49(1) of the Act and Short

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

capital gains. For answering this a look at section 45(3) and Section 45(4) of the Act are necessary

GOPAL S. PANDIT vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

capital gain and the cost of the new asset shall be charged under section 45 as the income of the previous