COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

1) falls in the machinery provisions. It deals with collection and recovery of tax. That provision is referred to in Section 4(2). Therefore, if a sum that is to be paid to the non-resident is chargeable to tax, tax is required 30 to be deducted. The sum which is to be paid may be income out of different

THE COMMONWEALTH TRUST LTD., CALICUT, KERALA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KERALA II, ERNAKULAM

capital gains and more particularly Section 50 falling under Part E. While now sub-section (1) of Section 55 which uses the expressions "adjusted" and "cost of improvement" http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 14 of 15 applies for the purposes of Section 48, 49 and 50, sub- section (2

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) DELHI vs. HARPRASAD & CO. (P) LTD

In the result, the appeal is accepted with costs

2(6C) provides that ’income’ includes (among other things)-"(vi) any capital gain chargeable under Section 128." From the charging provisions of the Act, it is discernible that the words ’income’ or ’Profits and gains’ should be understood as including losses also, so that, in one, sense ’profits and gains’ represent ’plus income’ whereas losses represent ’minus income’(1

PRAKASH NATH KHANNA vs. COMMNR OF INCOME TAX

Capital gains" and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub-section (1) of Section 72, or sub-section (2

SASI ENTERPRISES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Egmore), Chennai, For The Willful & Deliberate Failure To File Returns For The Assessment Years 1991-92, 1992-93 & Hence Committing Offences Punishable Under Section 276 Cc Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”). Complaints Were Filed On 21.8.1997 After Getting The Sanction From The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai Under Section 279(1) Of The Income Tax Act. Appellants Filed Two Discharge Petitions Under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C., Which Were Dismissed By The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vide Order Dated 14.6.2006. Appellants Preferred Crl. R.C. Nos.781 To 786 Of 2006 Before The High Court Of Madras Which Were Dismissed By The High Court Vide Its Common Order Dated 2.12.2006, Which Are The Subject Matters Of These Appeals.

Capital gains” and claims that the loss or any part thereof should be carried forward under sub-section (1) of section 72, or sub-section (2

M.S.P. NADAR SONS, VIRUDHU NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), MADRAS

capital gains Rs. 5,61,508.00 LESS, Deduction under Rs. 5,000.00 --------------- Section 80-T (b) Rs. 5,65,508.00 LESS:Deduction under section 80-T (b) (ii) at 50% Rs. 2,78,254.00 ---------------- 449 LESS Loss on sale Rs. 2,76,254.00 of shares Rs. 96,583.00 ---------------- Profits: Rs. 1

VATSALA SHENOY vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

1) of the 1961 Act speaks about capital gains arising out of “transfer” of a capital asset. The definition of the expression “transfer” is contained in Section 2

N. BAGAVATHY AMMAL vs. COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MADURAI

capital gain tax under Section 45, we agree with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in coming to the conclusion that it is difficult to interpret Section 46(2) as including agricultural lands which is outside the scope of the Income Tax." Of the two questions referred to the High Court by the Tribunal under Section 256(1

SEDCO FOREX INTERNATIONAL INC. THR. ITS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY MR. NAVIN SARDA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MEERUT

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

capital asset situated 38 in India (referred as business income). Explanation 1(a) to Section 9(1)(i) of the Act provides an exclusion in the case of operations which are not carried out in India. The explanation provides that the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only that part

THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS (INCOME TAX) vs. TIGER GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL II HOLDINGS

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

gains arising to the assessees from the transfer may not be deemed to accrue / arise in India in light of Section 9 of the ITA. According to the learned Senior Counsel, a plain reading of Section 90 establishes that the only requirement that needs to be satisfied in respect of treaty eligibility under Section 90(2) is the satisfaction

TEA ESTATE INDIA (P) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

section 2(6A)(c) there can be no doubt that such excess or profit is a realisation of capital rise and not profit of the business. As according to the decision of the http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 13 Supreme Court in Short Brothers’(1) case unless such appreciation has been included in capital gains

R & B FALCON (A) PTY LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeal is allowed to the above extent

gains) incurred any expense on, or made any payment for, the following purposes, namely:- (A) entertainment; xxx xxx xxx (F) conveyance; xxx xxx xxx (Q) tour and travel (including foreign travel).; (3) For the purposes of sub-section (1), the privilege, service, facility or amenity does not include perquisites in respect of which tax is paid http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT

M/S JINDAL EQUIPMENT LEASING CONSULTANCY SERVICES LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN

1. Whether shares received by the assesses on amalgamation are entitled to the benefit of section 47(vii) without the Tribunal concluding that the said shares were held by the assesses as capital assets? 2. Whether the benefit of Section 47(vii) is limited to determination of capital gains

NECTAR BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. vs. DEPUTY COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX

gains of business or profession and accordingly chargeable to income-tax as the income of that previous year, whether the business or profession in respect of which the allowance or deduction has been made is in existence in that year or not. We also quote hereinbelow Section 41(2) [Omitted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions

K.M. SHARMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(7),NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

1. The appellant’s lands were acquired under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and an award was passed on 2.12.1967 by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi granting compensation in favour of the appellant. The Additional District Judge by Judgment dated 20.5.1980 held the appellant entitled to 1/32 share of the compensation awarded under various awards and the appellant

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS vs. M/S. MADURAI MILLS CO. LIMITED

1) of section 12B along with its first proviso was as under : "The tax shall be payable by an assessee under the head ’capital gains’ in respect of any profits or gains arising from the sale, exchange, relinquishment or transfer, of a capital asset effected after the 31st day of March, 1956, and such profits and gains shall be deemed

THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CALICUT

Bench: Us, The Assessing Officer Denied Their Claims For Deduction, Relying Upon Section 80P(4) Of The It Act, Holding That As Per The Audited Receipt & 2

gains attributable to such activities as does not exceed,— 17 (i) where such co-operative society is a consumers’ co-operative society, one hundred thousand rupees; and (ii) in any other case, fifty thousand rupees. Explanation.—In this clause, “consumers’ co-operative society” means a society for the benefit of the consumers; (d) in respect of any income

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MAHENDRA MILLS

The appeal is dismissed

Capital gains. Various sections deal with how income, profits and gains under each http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 21 head have to be computed. Section 10 deals with the computation of profits and gains of any business carried on by an assessee. Section 10(2) prescribes the allowances which have to be deducted before computing