COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

transfer, then for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-IA, the profits and gains of such eligible business shall be computed by adopting arm’s length pricing. In other words, if the assessing officer rejects the price as not corresponding to the market value of such good, then he has to compute the sale price of the good

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KERALA, ERNAKULAM vs. TRAVANCORE SUGAR & CHEMICALS LTD

price fixed for the transfer of assets. Under the contract, the company had to engage only the Travancore labour and staff, that it had to take apprentices recommended by the Government and train them and that there was no limitation as to the period the company had to pay the annual sum out of the net profits, nationally computed

VATSALA SHENOY vs. JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

price. (v) The date of deposit of the bid amount of 92 crores by AOP-3, being the ₹ highest bid, is on November 17, 1994. 8) With the aforesaid background facts, we advert to the developments that have taken place on the income tax front. 9) Since the firm stood dissolved with effect from December 06, 1987, upto December

KALOORAM GOVINDRAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX, MADHYA PRADESH

The appeal is allowed with costs here and in the High Court

price, certain business assets which were after withdrawal from the business settled upon trust. But neither of these cases has a bearing on the computation of depreciation allowance which is qua building, machinery, plant (not being ships) or furniture to be a percentage of the written-down value. A person who transfers

MISS DHUN DADABHOY KAPADIA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY

transfer the right, and the amount which she lost in the form of depreciation of her original shares in order to acquire that right. [5 A-E] 2 C.I.T,. Bihar v. Dalmia Investment Co. Ltd. [1964] 7 S.C.R. 210 followed. JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 757 of 1965. Appeal from the judgment and order dated August 24/25

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

transfer of capital asset and the cost of any improvement thereon are not the subject of any controversy in the case before us. Section 49 is not applicable as the capital asset was not acquired by any of the modes mentioned in that section. Coming to Section 50 it states, in so far as it relevant, that when depreciation

SIR KIKABHAI PREMCHAND vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL),BOMBAY

depreciated market value and leave at cost price the assets which had risen. There are two cases which bear a superficial resem- blance to this case. They are In the matter of Messrs. Chouthmal Golapchand (1) and In re The Spanish Prospecting Company Limited (1). We refrain from expressing any opinion about them, especially as they appear to reach different

VODAFONE IDEA LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 26 (2)

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Transfer Pricing Adjustment, Capitalization of Licence Fees, 3G Spectrum Fees, Asset Restoration Cost Obligation including the effect of amalgamation of group entities which required thorough scrutiny and determination. G] During the pendency of said Writ Petition, a letter was issued by the respondent No.1 on 23.07.2018, the relevant portion of which was as under :- "The assessment years for which request

NAVIN JINDAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

price per share on 6th January, 1992, was Rs.425/-, resulting in a loss of Rs.200/- per share. Consequently, the capital loss suffered by the assessee was Rs.3,00,000/- [1500 x 200] as against the receipt of Rs.56,250/- on renunciation of 1875 PCDs. To complete the chronology of events, on 7th August, 1991, assessee sold 8460 equity shares

SAHARANPUR ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. LTD. ETC. ETC. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ETC.ETC

price, the surplus is brought to tax. On the other hand, where the depreciation allowed is inadequate and the amount realised by the assessee on the sale, demolition or destruction of the asset is much less than the written down value, the assesee is allowed to write off the difference between the written down value and the scrap value

M/S GUZDAR KAJORA COAL-MINES LTD. CALCUTTA vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CALCUTTA

transfer of the mines the value taken by the department for the purpose of determining depreciation Was much lower. It was pointed out that the purchase had been made after obtaining, the 745 opinion of an expert and the assessee was being subjected to great hardship depreciation being determined only on the old written down value of the assets

WESTERN STATES TRADING CO LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CALCUTTA

In the result the appeals are allowed with costs in this

depreciation, worked out the figure of loss at Rs. 11,257.00; however he rejected a claim to set off this loss against the appellant’s other income on the view that the assessee did not carry on the business of the colliery during the year since the transfer took place with effect from September 1, 1954. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner

M/S. TECHNO SHARES & STOCKS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV

depreciation was not admissible under Section 32(1)(ii). 14. To decide the above controversy, we need to examine the Rules of BSE. 15. Rule 5, quoted above, states that membership shall constitute a personal permission from the Exchange to exercise the rights and privileges attached thereto. Rule 6 inter alia states that membership shall not be alienable. Rule

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. UNITED PROVINCES ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO

In the result, appeal is allowed

depreciable assets of the assessee and as per the details given in his order computed the written down value of those assets at Rs.2,06,48,985/- and determined the profit of Rs.1,29,35,557/- under Section 41(2) of the Act and added the same to the income of the assessee. In appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner

COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX vs. M/S ADANI GAS LTD

The appeal is allowed in the above terms

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

depreciation. They are not collected as a consideration for providing a service; and under Article 366(29-A)(d), a tax on the sale or purchase of goods includes a tax on the transfer of the right to use goods for any purpose, without necessarily transferring the title. Section 65(105)(zzzzj) was introduced with the intention of capturing services

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY CIRCLE II vs. THE NATIONAL SYNDICATE, BOMBAY

depreciation which did not really take place. But more of it later. Express Newspapers Ltd. case (1) is also distinguishable. In that case, the Free Press of India (Madras) Ltd. resolved on August 31, 1946, to transfer the right of printing and publishing its daily newspapers to Express Newspapers Ltd. They rented out their machinery, etc., to the new Company

SHIV RAJ GUPTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI IV

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

transfer of shares. This finding would clearly be in the teeth of Section 260-A (4), requiring the judgment to be set aside on this score. 15. Coming to the merits, the High Court found: “22. …No doubt, market price of each share was only Rs.3/- per share and the purchase price under the MOU was Rs.30/-, but the total

M/S M.S.SHOES EAST LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CUSTOMS,NEW DELHI

depreciation cannot be taken into account, despite the fact that while the Bill of Entry of the car was presented in 1996, the clearance was given on 28.3.2005. The submission of the appellant that there was delay of nine years in releasing the car from the date of import has in our opinion no relevance at all as the value