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

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

91 of the Trusts Act. The personal obligation created by a contract of sale is described in Section 40 of the Transfer of Property Act as an obligation arising out of contract and annexed to the ownership of property, but not amounting to an interest or easement therein." In India, the word `transfer' is defined with reference to the word

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

house property. 61. The CIT(A) reversed this finding of the AO holding that the lease of ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 28 of 36 space is a part of the Assessee‟s business and such expenditure incurred on the lease is a part of the business and such expenditure and exploitation of the stock in trade is admissible

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

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

house property. 61. The CIT(A) reversed this finding of the AO holding that the lease of ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 28 of 36 space is a part of the Assessee‟s business and such expenditure incurred on the lease is a part of the business and such expenditure and exploitation of the stock in trade is admissible

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Chirla Rama Reddy, Contract

Appeal is dismissed with costs

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.S.A.No.70/2007

house of 3rd defendant. Thus, the direct execution of the sale deed Ex.P1 is spoken by PW1 and PW6 but the legal formality of registration was not effected. 82. The features of valid contract as mentioned in Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 are offer and acceptance, legal relationship, contractual capacity, competency of the parties to enter into

The Commissioner of Income -Tax - III, vs. Shri Taher Ali

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

House Rates Control Act, 1947 3 / 79 CRA-322-08gr (for short, 'Act'). The leaned trial Judge also accepted grounds under section 13(1)(e) (unlawful subletting by defendant no.1 in favour of defendant no.2) and 13(1)(k) (non user of the suit premises by defendant no.1-tenant). The Appellate Court decreed the suit only under section

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S GOLDEN STAR FACILITIES AND SERVICES PVT LTD., HYD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 13 which provides for Rule making power of the Central Government in respect of minerals. Section 13 subsection (1) WP(C). 11249/2010 & other contd cases. -:88:- and Section 13 Sub-section (2) in so far as relevant in the present case are as follows: “13. Power of Central Government to make Rules in respect of minerals.-- (1) The Central

Sampathirao Apparao vs. Income Tax Officer,

The appeals stand dismissed

property. The surrendered income included cash seized from the bank account of Sarup Chand. 5. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 28.04.2009 framed assessment for the assessment year 2007-08 qua both the appellants herein. The assessment order was also passed with respect to tax liability of Sarup Chand. No tax liability was found of Sarup Chand though

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

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

Section 16 of the State Act were also referred to. It is submitted that PDB during her lifetime did not have any right of nomination of any Member of the managing committees to the societies or any trust. This Court did not vest the joint APLs with power which PDB during her lifetime did not have in respect

The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. M/s Vaishnavi Educational Society

In the result, this Cross Objection is allowed and the suit is

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

house; further admitting, in page 7, that his address in the Sale Deeds is that of the daughter of the Owners. No document to show his income was produced, except a statement of his account with Federal Bank, which had no substantial balance. He also admitted that he had filed no Income Tax Returns RFA 554/15 & CON. CASES

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, HYDERABAD vs. M/s. The A.P.Vardhaman(Mahila)Cooperative Urban

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

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

house property is not covered under income from banking business. Our attention has also been invited to Totgars’ Cooperative Sale Society Limited v ITO[20] in support of his contentions. As observed by the Supreme Court therein the said decision was confined to the facts of the said case and their Lordships were not dealing with cases relating to cooperative

Commissioner of Income Tax -II vs. The Agrasen Coop. Urban Bank Ltd.,

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

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

house property is not covered under income from banking business. Our attention has also been invited to Totgars’ Cooperative Sale Society Limited v ITO[20] in support of his contentions. As observed by the Supreme Court therein the said decision was confined to the facts of the said case and their Lordships were not dealing with cases relating to cooperative

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. The Andhra Bank Employees Co.Operative Bank Limited

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

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

house property is not covered under income from banking business. Our attention has also been invited to Totgars’ Cooperative Sale Society Limited v ITO[20] in support of his contentions. As observed by the Supreme Court therein the said decision was confined to the facts of the said case and their Lordships were not dealing with cases relating to cooperative

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/S The A.P.Mahesh Coop. Urban Bank Ltd,

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

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

house property is not covered under income from banking business. Our attention has also been invited to Totgars’ Cooperative Sale Society Limited v ITO[20] in support of his contentions. As observed by the Supreme Court therein the said decision was confined to the facts of the said case and their Lordships were not dealing with cases relating to cooperative

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

Bench: L.NARASIMHA REDDY,T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

91. The Trial (--crrrt found that both the parties create,d tlLe documents to avoid Caprte.l (.: ns Tax and that the Development Agrr:ements were not capable of -ri tnsferring title and hence cannol. bc trerrted as valid documents. 92. In this cc,rrirr;

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

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

91. The Trial (--crrrt found that both the parties create,d tlLe documents to avoid Caprte.l (.: ns Tax and that the Development Agrr:ements were not capable of -ri tnsferring title and hence cannol. bc trerrted as valid documents. 92. In this cc,rrirr;

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

91. The Trial (--crrrt found that both the parties create,d tlLe documents to avoid Caprte.l (.: ns Tax and that the Development Agrr:ements were not capable of -ri tnsferring title and hence cannol. bc trerrted as valid documents. 92. In this cc,rrirr;

SRI PAVAN KUMAR AGARWAL vs. DY. CIT, NIZAMABAD.

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 69 of the Act an,l s:l:,mr:s thqt \r thc saitl orr vision has been duly applied lry th,: Tribunal. 'l hcrc[rrre, d c eppcal shc_ruld bc dismissed. I I I I i I I I I I 6 .-r 10. We have heard learned counscl for the partics ancl perused thc matcrials

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s Indur Green Power Private Limited

In the result, all the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

property, credits and liabilities of the Company; and, subject to any reasonable restrictions as to the time and manner of inspecting the same that may be imposed in accordance with the regulations of the Company for the time being in force, the accounts shall be open to the inspection of the members. Once at least in every year, the accounts