KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

capital assets not charged u/s 45 shall be deemed to be the profit and gains chargeable to tax of the successor company. Section 47A(3) has used the word ‘any’ clause (d) of proviso to section 47(xiii) specifies that the aggregate of the share holding of the partners of the firm in the company should not be less than

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: This Bench.

Section 45(4) of the I.T. Act? or Whether the retiring partner would be liable to pay for the capital gains?” FACTUAL MATRIX 3. Before we proceed to answer the said substantial questions of law, it is necessary to have a look at the factual background. 4 4. M/s.Dynamic Enterprises-the respondent herein is a partnership firm which came into

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

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

gain on sale of “technical know-how” was is not capital in nature and it is also not chargeable to tax under Section 45 of the Act when the assessing authority rightly brought to tax as by holding that the consideration received by - 3 - assessee towards sale of technical know-how was capital in nature of goodwill which is liable

ANTONY PARAKAL KURIAN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed in part

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S RACHAIAH

Capital gains amounting to Rs.2,23,47,434/- was claimed as an exemption under Section 54 of the Act and Rs.25 Lakhs is claimed as an exemption for making investment in REC bonds under Section 54EC of the Act. The contention of the appellant 6 was that out of the advance amount of Rs.50 lakhs received from M/s. Fashion Jewellery

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LATE KHOOBCHAND M MAKHIJA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

capital gains, when the Section contemplates exemption in respect of “a” house for the current assessment year? 2. Whether the Tribunal committed an error in holding that the assessee is entitled to the - 6 - benefit of exemption under Section 54(2) of the Act, insofar as the investment of Rs.1.70 crores in nationalized banks? 5

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

5 (SC)] while considering the provision of Section 53 of the TP Act in the context of capital gains under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MRS SHAKUNTALA DEVI

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,JAYANT PATEL

capital gain of `1,44,68,032/- and had claimed exemption under Section 54 of the Act on the ground that assessee had reinvested said amount for purchasing another property at Mumbai by paying an advance of `1,60,00,000/- as against total value of property at `3,25,00,000/-. Assessing officer has held that agreement to purchase

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

Section 45(4) of the Act is attracted and assessee is liable to pay capital gains. 5. Aggrieved by the said

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

The appeal is allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,DILIP B.BHOSALE

capital gain. There is no dispute regarding the said transaction. The saleable items were sold during financial year 2000-01 and remaining raw materials was shifted to rented warehouse while handing over the factory to HILKAL Ltd. All these raw materials are unsalable items, they 20 are toxic materials of Bulk Drug section, they are waste, have no sale value

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

Section 145A of the Income- tax Act which was inserted with effect from assessment year 1999-2000. The said provision states that the valuation of stock should include the amount of any tax duty, cess or fee - 94 - actually paid or incurred to bring the goods to its present location and condition. The Department has followed a consistent stand

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

Appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH,ASHOK S.KINAGI

5 (SC)] while considering the provision of Section 53 of the TP Act in the context of capital gains under

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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains tax without taking into account the agreement and assignment deed in the proper prospective and consequently recorded a perverse finding by holding that the same cannot be brought 5 to tax both in the Block Assessment as well as regular assessment?” 3. Learned Counsel Sri. K.V. Aravind, appearing for the Revenue, would contend that section

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

Appeal is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

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 guntas at Mahadevapura through public auction from the appropriate authority of the Income Tax Department

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

In the result, the findings

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

capital gains'. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act on 30.01.2004 and a refund of Rs.4,77,163/- was issued. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 148 of the Act on 28.07.2005. The appellant filed the return of income on 17.04.2006 in response to the notice under Section 148 of the Act declaring income

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

capital gain is allowable to investment made in residential building and not investment made on land. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing ITA.No.456/2017 - 4 - Officer, the respondent-assessee filed appeal in ITA No.968/R- 8/CIT(A)–V/2011-12 before the Appellate Authority. 3. The Appellate Authority, on appreciation of material on record accepted the contentions of the assessee and observed

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

5 - petitioner has offered tax on capital gain towards the transaction of transfer of part of its rights in the capital assets of trademark. Reasons recorded by the learned Assessing Officer for the notice dated 03.03.2015 under Section

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

5 - petitioner has offered tax on capital gain towards the transaction of transfer of part of its rights in the capital assets of trademark. Reasons recorded by the learned Assessing Officer for the notice dated 03.03.2015 under Section