M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

deemed to be dividend in terms of section 2(22)(e) of the Act, although the said provision would not be applicable? 5. We re-formulate the substantial question of law which we propose to answer and on which the arguments were heard by us, in the following manner:- “Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has power under Section

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

dividend which his wife received could not be deemed to be his income under section 16(1)(c) and that in his case section 16(3) did not apply, because there was no transfer of the shares to his wife. … … … … … … Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

dividend which his wife received could not be deemed to be his income under section 16(1)(c) and that in his case section 16(3) did not apply, because there was no transfer of the shares to his wife. … … … … … … Date of Judgment 25-09-2018 I.T.A.No.155/2016 and connected matters The Pr. Commissioner of Income

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

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

dividends and interest for which the assessee has to incur any expenditure. This is the consequence of computerization, online transaction through NEFT[National Electronic Fund Transfer], RTGS [Real Time Gross Settlement] and also DEMAT Accounts. The assessing authority should take note of these developments in deciding whether any expenditure is incurred in earning the said income. The discussion

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI.M.R.JANAKIRAM (HUF)

The appeal is allowed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,E.S.INDIRESH

deemed to be in the custody of the Tribunal as from the date of the order for the winding up of the company". Accordingly, the official liquidator had taken possession of the company's land ad measuring 176 acres, buildings, plants and machineries, fixtures and movable assets, residential quarters and sites etc., situated at Yantrapura, Harihara, Davangere District. Subsequently with

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) vs. M/S DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT LTD

In the result, we don to find any

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

transfer of the commodity or scripts: Provided that for the purposes of this clause — (a) a contract in respect of raw materials or merchandise entered into by a person in the course of his manufacturing or merchanting business to guard against loss through future price fluctuations in respect of his contracts for actual delivery of goods manufactured

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S QUEST GLOBAL ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD.,

In the result, we don to find any

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

transfer of the commodity or scripts: Provided that for the purposes of this clause — (a) a contract in respect of raw materials or merchandise entered into by a person in the course of his manufacturing or merchanting business to guard against loss through future price fluctuations in respect of his contracts for actual delivery of goods manufactured