The Commissioner of Income Tax - VI vs. M/s. Manikanta Iron AND Hardware

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

250/­ only.” 8.6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order  of the CIT (A), revenue as well as assessee  filed   appeals   before   the   Tribunal.   The  Tribunal   after   considering   the   submissions  and material on record held that the CIT has  committed an error by allowing the short term  loss   claimed   by   the   assessee,   though   the  assessee   could  not  establish   the  factum

The Commissioner of Income Tax(Central) vs. M/s.Madhu Enterprises

Bench: The Learned

gain on transfer of certain capital assets not to be charged in case of investment in residential house. *** *** *** Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where.– (a) the assessee,– (i) owns more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of the transfer of the original asset; or” 14. The AO held that

The Commissioner of Income Tax III, vs. M/s. Swagath Seeds Private Limited

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 250(4) of the Act, directed the Assessing Officer to submit the Remand Report. The relevant extract of the remand report reads as under: “Addition as long term capital gain

The Commissioner of Income tax vs. M/s. ragamayee bAr AND Restaurant,

The appeals stand dismissed

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

capital gains; or (b) income of the nature referred to in sub-clause (ix) of clause (24) of section 2, (c) income under the had “Profits and gains of business or profession” in case where the income accrues or arises under the said head for the first time, and the assessee has paid the whole of the amount

The Commissioner of Income Tax - III, vs. M/s. Suven Pharmaceuticals Limited,

Appeals are dismissed

250 or  section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or  section 263 or section 264 or an order of the  Settlement Commission under sub­section (4)  of section 245D, the amount on which interest  was   payable   under   sub­section   (1)   or   sub­ section (3) has been increased or reduced, as  the   case   may   be,   the   interest   shall   be  increased or reduced

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

Section 27 begins with a proviso and states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered, in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, 49 whether it amounts to a confession

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 178 of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, the Chairman of the company, HVL cannot arrogate unto himself the power to cause such appointment when such power ultimately rests with the Board of Directors. The observation of the two Joint APLs that the evident performance of BCrL, the flagship company of MP Birla Group is deteriorating ever since, HVL became

M/s Durga Granites, vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1,

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

250 of 2023 ----- M/s. Black Stone Works, (A Partnership Firm), having its works at Mauza Desh Pokharia & Amjhor, P.O. & P.S. Mirjachowki, District Sahebganj, through its Partner, namely, Ved Prakash Khudania, aged about 63 years, son of Suraj Mal Khudania, resident of 35, Mahajan Patti, Sahebganj, P.O. & P.S. Sahebganj, District Sahebganj, PIN-816190, Jharkhand. ..........Petitioner. -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand