Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur. vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Kangiri.

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

Capital gains”, or “income from other sources” or from a trade or business carried on by it which accrues or arises from the supply of a commodity or service (not being water or electricity) within its own jurisdictional area or from the supply of water or electricity within or outside its own jurisdictional area. Explanation.- For the purposes of this

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Laila Impex,

Accordingly answered against the Revenue. The appeals fail and are dismissed, without

Capital gains") for— (i) the transfer of all or any rights (including the granting of a licence) in respect of a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark or similar property ; (ii) the imparting of any information concerning the working of, or the use of, a patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade

The Commissioner of Income Tax - IV vs. M/s. Mekins Agro Product (P) Ltd.

gains, or other sources, the word 'income' should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purpose of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise.lt should be noted, in this connection, that

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s Pokarna Limited

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

capital gains. This classification under distinct heads of income profits and gains is made having regard to the sources from which income is derived. Income-tax is undoubtedly levied on the total taxable income of the taxpayer and the tax levied is a single tax on the aggregate taxable receipts from all the sources; it is not a collection

M/S UNICORN AGRO TECH LIMITED, SECUNDERABAD. vs. THE ASST. COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX, HYDERABAD.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

II Appearance:- Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Agnibesh Sengupta, Adv. Mr. Saptarshi Kar, Adv. .….For the Appellant. Mr. Om Narayan Rai, Adv. …..For the Respondent. ITA NO. 48 OF 2009 REPORTABLE Page 2 of 19 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.) 1. This appeal filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

ii)  riot or civil disturbance; or (iii)  accidental fire or explosion; or (iv)  action by an enemy or action taken in  combating an enemy (whether with or without a  declaration of war), then, any profits or gains arising from receipt  of such money or other assets shall be chargeable  to income­tax under the head "Capital gains" and  shall be deemed

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Jayalakshmi Chits

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

ii)  riot or civil disturbance; or (iii)  accidental fire or explosion; or (iv)  action by an enemy or action taken in  combating an enemy (whether with or without a  declaration of war), then, any profits or gains arising from receipt  of such money or other assets shall be chargeable  to income­tax under the head "Capital gains" and  shall be deemed

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

ii)  riot or civil disturbance; or (iii)  accidental fire or explosion; or (iv)  action by an enemy or action taken in  combating an enemy (whether with or without a  declaration of war), then, any profits or gains arising from receipt  of such money or other assets shall be chargeable  to income­tax under the head "Capital gains" and  shall be deemed

Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Sattenapalli

In the result, the order of the income tax appellate tribunal

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

1) Save as otherwise provided in this act, where the net result for any assessment year in respect of any source falling under any 12 head of income, other than “Capital gains”, is a loss, the assessee shall be entitled to have the amount of such loss set off against his income from any other source under the same head

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 5 vs. M/s Vijay Textiles Limited

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

capital gains at that point of time. Article 1 to 4 of the settlement deed dated 2nd April 2004 is reproduced hereunder: Article I- Assignment: 35 (1) The FIRST PARTY confirms that in pursuance to the development Agreement they have permitted the SECOND PARTY to carry out construction/ development on the Schedule Property. The SECOND PARTY is entitled to continue

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), vs. M/s Country Club Inda Limited

capital asset situate in India: [Explanation 1] –For the purposes of this clause—(a) in the case of a business of which all the operations are not carried out in India, the income of the business deemed under this clause to accrue or arise in India shall be only such part of the income as is reasonably attributable

K.V.D.PRASAD RAO vs. THE JT.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

35 years, plot No. 77. I^9T-ul'" Coop. Housing Society, Road No. 7A, Jrbtie" r_r1lr, , nt;juio"o _ 500033. ( Appellate No. 2 to 4 are bro-ught on_record as LRS of the deceased Appelate No 1 vide C.O. dated 04-Ot_20i7 in ilTAMp No. I ;f 201S ) \\l) I l:e -ltrint ('.r,,rissio.er or'lnoome

Sampathirao Apparao vs. Income Tax Officer,

The appeals stand dismissed

capital gain arising out of sale proceeds of house, thus, Assessing Officer requested Commissioner of Income Tax for adjustment of seized amount towards the tax liability of appellants. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar vide letter dated 26.06.2009 permitted Assessing Officer to adjust seized cash against tax liability of appellants. The Assessing Officer, accordingly, adjusted seized cash against

M/s. Maruthi Movies vs. Income Tax Officer

Bench: This Court & Making The Same A Rule Of Court, Alongwith Decree Against Respondents Awarding Rs.5,35,920/- Paid By The Petitioner To The Arbitrator As Their Share Of Fees As Per Order Dated 21.12.2010. 2. Respondent No.1 Has Filed Its Objections To The Award Under Section 30 & 33 Of The Act In Form Of I.A. No.9067/2011. Respondent No.2 Has Also Filed Its Objections To The Award.

Capital of only Rs.2000/- and did not even have a bank account on the date of entering into the Agreement. They submit that even the amount of Rs.1.25 lac stated to have been deposited with the L&DO was infact paid by Mr.R.Ganguly and not by the petitioner. They submit that therefore, the petitioner was neither ready nor willing

THEE COMMSSR.OF INCOME TAX.HYD. vs. CHALLA SHANKER REDDY.HYD.

Bench: L.NARASIMHA REDDY,T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

ii; H"yd,:rab rd ... APPELLI\NT/ PLAINTIFF AND N Vijayalaksh^ri Wio N M ghgqd|rary,.gSed about _ yerrs, )cc Housewife, R/o Ptor No 1!rJ Road No -14, Jub;te;'Hil;;yl"ilt"o .., RESPONDEN,I-l DEFENDANT ctTY CtvtL COUFIr ITPPEAL No: 81 of 20O2 Regurar l\pcear under Section g6 0f c.p.c against the Jucgment

COMMR.OF I.T. RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/S.NARAYANA CHOWDARYAND ORS KAKINADA

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

ii; H"yd,:rab rd ... APPELLI\NT/ PLAINTIFF AND N Vijayalaksh^ri Wio N M ghgqd|rary,.gSed about _ yerrs, )cc Housewife, R/o Ptor No 1!rJ Road No -14, Jub;te;'Hil;;yl"ilt"o .., RESPONDEN,I-l DEFENDANT ctTY CtvtL COUFIr ITPPEAL No: 81 of 20O2 Regurar l\pcear under Section g6 0f c.p.c against the Jucgment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - (TDS), vs. M/s. Suman Chit Funds (P) Ltd.,

ii; H"yd,:rab rd ... APPELLI\NT/ PLAINTIFF AND N Vijayalaksh^ri Wio N M ghgqd|rary,.gSed about _ yerrs, )cc Housewife, R/o Ptor No 1!rJ Road No -14, Jub;te;'Hil;;yl"ilt"o .., RESPONDEN,I-l DEFENDANT ctTY CtvtL COUFIr ITPPEAL No: 81 of 20O2 Regurar l\pcear under Section g6 0f c.p.c against the Jucgment

M/S.P.SATYANARAYANA AND SONS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1[9], HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

ii) allow the appeal and set aside the order passed by the ITAT Bangalore in ITA No.1376/Bang/2008, dated 17-07-2009 and confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order 14 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-19(1), International Taxation, Bangalore. These appeals coming on for Hearing this day, N. KUMAR J., delivered the following