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

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains. It is further contended that, no doubt, sub-section [2] of section 55 of the Act was amended with effect from 1.4.2002 by inserting the words ‘or a trademark or brand name associated with a business’, the transaction involving transfer of goodwill is liable to tax under Section 55(2) of the Act during the relevant assessment year

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

capital gains, and also disallowed 50% of expenses on transfer claimed by the assessee. Besides this, certain other disallowances were also made by the Assessing Officer. Challenging the same, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who granted certain relief, but confirmed the reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Act; the assessment

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

gains, as an essential object for forming an AOP. However the CBDT Circular explaining the above insertion states that such insertion was only to take care of the claim of certain bodies that they did not fall within the definition of a ‘person’ for the sole reason, that they were not supposed to have any income or profits. Section

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIT (A) vs. SHRI J KRISHNA PALEMAR

Appeal is allowed;

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

capital gain whatsoever shown in the return of income for the A.Y.2009-10 by the assessee on sale of this flat. It means, the assessee himself has not recognized the sale on 6.1.2009. Hence it is assumed that this flat was still in the ownership of the assessee on the date of transfer of the land at Mysore during the financial

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI DINESH D RANKA

The appeal is allowed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR

75,000/- by the assessee from L & T, the developer of the adjoining land in respect of the transfer of 7575.37 square meters of FAR in assessee’s residential plot measuring 1.6 acres is not transferable as the same is not a capital asset and consequently no capital gains can be levied? 3. Brief facts of the case

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SUBEX LTD

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

capital account and hence allowing it as not taxable?” 3. In this appeal, the focus is on two items deducted from the profit as per the profit and loss account viz., [1] Exchange gain on Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds [FCCBs] reinstatement of Rs.60,75,80,000/- [2] Deduction under Section

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

75. The case of the assessee is that the finished goods are liable to excise duty. The company has opted for MODVAT scheme for the payment of excise duty on the finished goods - 93 - manufactured. Under the scheme, the excise duty paid on the purchase of raw materials and components is held as advance i.e., as MODVAT credit. In other

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

The appeals stand disposed of, accordingly

Bench: N.KUMAR,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

75. The case of the assessee is that the finished goods are liable to excise duty. The company has opted for MODVAT scheme for the payment of excise duty on the finished goods - 93 - manufactured. Under the scheme, the excise duty paid on the purchase of raw materials and components is held as advance i.e., as MODVAT credit. In other

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. NUTRINE CONFECTIONERY CO. P. LTD.,

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

capital gains sustainable under Section 65 of the Act? 4. The Apex Court in the case of PNB Finance Ltd. V/s. Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in (2008) 307 ITR 75

V.S. CHANDRASHEKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the first substantial question of law is

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

capital gains' and 3 not under the head 'profit and gains from business or profession? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law in holding that provisions of Section 50C are applicable to the instant case of sale of subject land by the appellant? (iv) Whether

LATE SMT KRISHNA BAJAJ vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

capital gain tax, the fair market value, which is to be taken into consideration, is the price the property would fetch on sale in the open market on the relevant date. The material on record discloses the guideline value as on 1.4.1981 in respect of the property in dispute would work out to Rs.110/- per sq.ft. The assessee was assessed

THE COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S B V REDDY MARKETING P. LTD

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

capital gain tax as held by the Assessing Officer? 5. The Apex Court in the case of PNB Finance Ltd. V/s. Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in (2008) 307 ITR 75(SC) has held as under: “17. As regards applicability of Section

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

gains, or other sources, the word `income’ should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purposes of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise. It should be noted, in this connection

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. M/S INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

gains, or other sources, the word `income’ should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purposes of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise. It should be noted, in this connection

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

gains, or other sources, the word `income’ should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purposes of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise. It should be noted, in this connection

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

M/S TELCO CONSTRUCTION CO.LTD vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

75 DTR 367. 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the assessee came into existence by virtue of technical licence agreement and therefore, payment under the agreement is capital expenditure. In this connection, our attention has been invited to Clause (b) as well as Clauses 2.1 and 2.2 of the agreement. It is also pointed

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT KAMALA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

gains, or other sources, the word `income’ should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purposes of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise. It should be noted, in this connection