July 2009

Section 48, Section 45, Section 54F, Section 55

Karnataka H.C : the assessee was entitled to claim deduction under s. 54F of the Act on the income derived from sale of shares on the ground that the same had been invested on a house owned by his wife at No. 797, Rustumbagh, Bangalore by taking into consideration certain unilateral agreement with contractors, tender forms for proposed construction only signed by the assessee and not by the other party and rejected by the AO and certain vouchers produced for the first time before the Tribunal and consequently recorded a perverse finding

/

High Court Of Karnataka CIT & Anr. vs. P.R. Seshadri Section 45, 48, 54F, 55(2)(a) Asst. Year 1996-97 D.V. Shylendra

Income Tax Case Laws, Section 68

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the Tribunal was not justified in concurring with the findings of the authorities below in treating the genuinely given gifts duly affirmed by way of affidavits, gift deeds, independent confirmations by the donors to the AO of the appellant and by filling copies of their respective bank accounts thus fulfilling all the three ingredients of a genuine gift of establishing the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of a transaction, so that so the orders of the Tribunal is bad in law and perverse and thus needs to be quashed.

/

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Smt. Kusum Lata Thakral vs. CIT Section 68 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Mrs. Daya

Section 133, Sec. 133A, Sec. 206A, Section 206

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The Tribunal is right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) dismissing the evidence found during the survey proceedings under s. 133A as ‘rough notes’ and not treating the differences as ‘serious defects’ in the ‘regular audited books of account’ produced at the time of assessment proceedings.

/

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Diplast Plastics Ltd. Section 133A, 260A Asst. Year 1998-99 Adarsh Kumar Goel

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security