PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1 vs. M/S WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD

Appeal stands dismissed accordingly

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

gain earned by the respondent as capital gain on the GDR. 2. Learned counsel submits that during

M/S KWALITY CAFE & RESTAURANT P LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR.

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

capital gains for surrender of goodwill of ‘Kwality’ trade mark and Rs.45 Lakhs towards termination of ice-cream

INDERPAL SINGH AHUJA vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER-CUM-A.C.I.T. ORS

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

capital gain and consequential tax liability. The appellant preferred appeal which came to be dismissed vide order dated

BHARTI BHUSHAN JINDAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUDHIANA

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

capital gains and income from other sources. Under the head ‘income from other sources’, in addition to bank

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER HEALTHCARE LTD

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

Capital gains"; (ii) any sum received as compensation, from the multilateral fund of the Montreal Protocol on Substances

M/S VIJAY KUMAR GARG CONTRACTORS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed

Bench: MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

capital gain of amount of Rs. 23,49,426 Was rom the income for working out an amount

M/S MAJESTIC AUTO LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF IT & ANR

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

capital expenditure or personal, laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of business shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the head “Profit and gains

M/S ROCKMAN CYCLES INDS. LTD. vs. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, LDH. AND ANR.

The appeals are allowed and impugned orders are

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

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 under the head "Profits and gains

M/S PANCHSHEEL TEXTILE MANFAC. & TRAD. vs. C I T AND ANR.

Bench: MRS. JUSTICE LISA GILL,MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA

capital borrow profession. scriptions paid periodically Mutual Benefit Societies which fu ibed, shall be deemed to be cap is clause;” .07.2006 passed by learned Inco ced as under:- see was not earlier engaged in However, from the previous ye 99, it has started the business ave been purchased and some s d in tion and 000- 006 uses

CIT-I CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PB.INFO&COMM. TECH. CORP. LTD. CHD.

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

capital receipts whereas the expenditure on development of plot/sheds was claimed to be Rs.9.54 crores. The assessee had submitted that since it was following project completion method, therefore, excess of receipts qua expenses would be accounted for by it in subsequent years i.e. in the year of MANJU 2023.03.16 11:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity