M/S.R.S.RANGADAS vs. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are disposed of, with no order as to costs

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

45(1) of the Act which states that profits and gains from transfer of the capital assets shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year in which the transfer takes place, the Assessing Officer held that income from capital gains from transfer/sale of one lakh equity shares of NIIT would be assessable

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

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s Matrix Power Pvt Ltd.,

capital gains). Under section 72, a provision has been made for carry forward and setting off of a loss sustained against the head of profits and gains of business or profession. Under section 72, where a loss which has been sustained under the head of profits and gains of business or profession cannot be set-off against income under

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

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

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-II, vs. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

45.  (1)  Any profits   or gains  arising  from  the  transfer   of   a   capital   asset   effected   in   the  previous  year  shall,  save  as otherwise  provided  in  sections 54,  54B,  54D,  54E,  54EA,  54EB,  54F,  54G  and  54H,   be   chargeable   to   income­tax   under  the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to  be the income of the previous year in which

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

45.  (1)  Any profits   or gains  arising  from  the  transfer   of   a   capital   asset   effected   in   the  previous  year  shall,  save  as otherwise  provided  in  sections 54,  54B,  54D,  54E,  54EA,  54EB,  54F,  54G  and  54H,   be   chargeable   to   income­tax   under  the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to  be the income of the previous year in which

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

45.  (1)  Any profits   or gains  arising  from  the  transfer   of   a   capital   asset   effected   in   the  previous  year  shall,  save  as otherwise  provided  in  sections 54,  54B,  54D,  54E,  54EA,  54EB,  54F,  54G  and  54H,   be   chargeable   to   income­tax   under  the head "Capital gains", and shall be deemed to  be the income of the previous year in which

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Sri Anand Prakash Sanghi

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

gains can be computed under Section 45. Electricity and phone connections were taken by M/s.MAPL with the intention to start business, which was a non starter, and ultimately ended up in rescission of contract. The learned counsel for the assessee points out that there is no recital in the agreement for sale produced at Annexures-A and B regarding possession

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, HYD vs. M/S. SUJANA METALS LTD, HYD

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

4 (vi) All publications have a copyright declaration. 11. The CIT (A) as well as ITAT have rightly held that in this backdrop provisions of Section 28(va) would not apply to the instant case. In this behalf, it is to be borne in mind that the ITA 549/2011 Page 13 of 16 clinical trial business which the assessee continues

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX vs. M/S V.SATAYANARAYANA

The appeal is allowed

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

gain (something) as the result of request or effort (Shorter Oxford Dictionary). In case of obtainment the initiative vests in the person who receives and in that context a demand or request from him will be a primary requisite for an offence under Section 5(1)(d) of the Act unlike an offence under Section 161 IPC, which, as noticed

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

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

4 it was agreed and n'c<,rrlcti that "in respect of shares r*rich are lock- in- pc r.io.l (2. 1 6,200 +13,9 6,300 -J1,12,500). Mr. Prasad I{.ro & S\\'C rvill jointly malrc endeavours to obtain r lrc \,r ( )bjection of SEBI for transfer of shares. In ',h. .\.('nr the SE.BI

The Commissoner of Income Tax I , vs. M/s. Alpha Thought Technologies P Ltd.,

In the result, the orders passed by the

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

4) of Section 115JA or (5) of Section 115JB of the Act. It was further held that provisions of Sub-Section 5 of Section 115JB opens the assessment of the application to all other provisions of the Act, except if specifically barred by that Section itself. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in KARNATAKA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Smt. Rama S. Gummadi vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

4 supra) was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Additional Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Mohanbhai Pamabhai5 and accordingly confirmed the judgment of this Court. As regards the reason on which the Tribunal has distinguished the judgment in Lingamallu Raghukumar (3 supra), Section 45 deals with capital gains

SMT. SHANTHA VIDYASAGAR ANNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2) HYDERABAD

In the result, the orders dated 09

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

capital asset in the assessment year lgg7 _gg and consequently no profit or gain accrued to the assessee in order to attra(:t Sections 45 and Section 4g of the Act. In support of the aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decision of thr: Supreme Court in Seshasayee Steels private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai

Sri Damodarlal Badruka vs. The Income Tax Officer

The appeal is allowed but in the circumstances with

Bench: A RAMALINGESWARA RAO,DILIP B. BHOSALE

4. The Assessee entered into an agreement with M/s Exclusive Properties (hereinafter ‘the Builder’) on 27th May, 1991 to construct flats on 985 sq. yards of land on her property. In terms of the said agreement the Builder was to develop and construct at its own costs and resources and in lieu thereof the Builder was to be allotted proprietary

The Commissioner of Income TAx-IV, vs. M/s. Mahaveer Enterprises (India) Limited

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

gain in the ultimate analysis, the question is whether such grievance could be made long after the alleged violation of Section 10(5). If actual physical possession was taken over from the erstwhile landowner on 7.12.1991 as is alleged in the present case any grievance based on Section 10(5) ought to have been made within a reasonable time

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 – Rs.2,94,26,600/-(point 7) The assessee’s argument in this regard are acceptable. Addition as income from other sources – Foreign Travel-Rs.1,12,475/-( Point