Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Section 2

Sec. 2(15), Sec. 10(20), Section 11, Section 143, Section 263, Section 80-I

Bombay H.C : Order passed by DIT(E) is beyond the scope of Sec. 263 of the I T. Act when the subject matter of revision is applicability of proviso to Sec. 2(15) and not denial of exemption u/s. 11

Avijit Das / April 26, 2019

Add to cart Uncategorized Pay for This Post Rated 0 out of 5 ₹100.00 Add to cart Buy this post

Bombay H.C : The Hon’ble ITAT was justified in upholding the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and thereby not sustaining the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that the Reserve and Surplus of lender companies viz. M/s NSN Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s KSN Trading Pvt. Ltd. exceeded the amount advanced to the assessee company thereby falling within the ambit of provision of sec. 2(22)(e)

Avijit Das / February 8, 2019

High Court Of Bombay Pr.CIT vs. Sunjewels International Ltd. Section 2(22)(e) Asst. Year 2009-10 S. C. Dharmadhikari & B. P.

Sec. 2(47), Sec. 143(1), Section 148, Section 54

Bombay H.C : The return was processed u/S. 143(1) of the Act and returned income was accepted

Avijit Das / December 14, 2018

High Court Of Bombay Amarjeet Thapar vs. ITO Section 2(47), 54, 143(1), 148 Asst. Year 2013-14 Akil Kureshi & M.S.

Sec. 2(22)(E), Sec. 142(1), Sec. 143(2), Section 132, Section 142, Section 153

Karnataka H.C : Agreement between the assessee and Smt. Vandana Poddar dated 24.05.2004 (seized documents A/BP/1) to pay her Rs.11 Crores and the payment of Rs. 11.05 Crores by MEL at the instance of the assessee who was the MS and the shareholder to M/s. Solid Real Estate Private Limited and in turn to Smt. Vandana Poddar would amount to deemed dividend as per Section 2(22)(e) of the Act, and the judgments of the Apex Court in 229 ITR 444, 290 ITR 893

Avijit Das / December 10, 2018

High Court Of Karnataka CIT (Central) And Anr. vs. Basant Poddar Section 2(22)(e), 132, 142(1), 143(2), 153A Asst. Year 2004-2005

Income Tax Case Laws, Section 139, Section 142, Section 148, Section 153, Section 17, Section 2, Section 45

Andhra Pradesh H.C : The assessee filed his return of wealth, for the assessment year 2009-2010, on 17.09.2010 declaring a net wealth of Rs.1,86,620/-; a notice was issued to him thereafter, under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957

Avijit Das / October 11, 2018

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh Devineni Avinash vs. Pr.CIT Section 2(e)(a), 2(ea)(v), 2(m), 3(2), 16(2), 17, 45, 139, 142, 148,

Bombay H.C : The Hon’ble ITAT has erred in proceeding to convert the protective assessment into a substantive assessment, by confirming the entire addition of Rs.99,36,274/u/s 2(22)(e)

Avijit Das / October 3, 2018

High Court Of Bombay Sahir Sami Khatib & Anr. vs. ITO & Anr. Section 2(22)(e) Asst. Year 2007-08 S. C.

Sec. 2(14), Income Tax Case Laws, Section 147, Section 264

Madras H.C : The assessee under Section 264 with further direction to the Assessing Officer to treat the lands in question as non-agricultural in nature as capital assets, in the hands of the assessee, exigible to capital gain tax.

Avijit Das / September 26, 2018

High Court Of Madras Pallavarajha vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. Section 2(14), 147, 264 Asst. Year 2008-09 K.

Sec. 2(47), Income Tax Case Laws, Section 132, Section 45, Section 48

Kerala H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circums ances of the case, the assessee is exigible to income tax for short term capital gains in the assessment year 1999-2000?

Avijit Das / September 24, 2018

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Harbour View (Now Known As Harbour View Residency Pvt. Ltd.) Section 2(47), 45, 48,

Sec. 36(1)(va), Sec. 2(24), Section 28

Kerala H.C : Whether the term ‘amounts payable’ as used in the relevant provision of law does take in employee’s contribution as well, or will it stand confined to employer’s contribution alone?

Avijit Das / July 2, 2018

High Court Of Kerala Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT Section 36(1)(va) , 28, 2(24) Asst. Year 2008-09

Sec. 2(14), Section 45

Gujarat H.C : The proceeds from sale of land is to be treated income from capital gain

Avijit Das / June 26, 2018

High Court Of Gujarat Pr.CIT vs. Heenaben Bhadresh Mehta Section 2(14), 45 Asst. Year 2009-10 M.R. Shah & A.Y. Kogje,

Post pagination

1 2 … 50 Next →

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top