Category: Section 45

Karnataka H.C : The firm, M/s.Srinivasa Enterprises, was the owner of the capital asset viz. land and building comprised in Gopal theatre situated at Tank Road, Doddaballapur

High Court Of Karnataka S.K. Ravikumar vs. ITO Section 45(4) Ravi Malimath & K. Natarajan, JJ. Income Tax Appeal No. 82 OF 2010 28th November, 2018 Counsel Appeared: Priya V., Advocate G.K.V. Murthy, Advocate for the Petitioner.: K. V. Aravind, Advocate for the Respondent RAVI MALIMATH, J. 1. The assessee is a partnership firm in the …

Madras H.C : There was a dissolution of the firm as on 31st March 2002 and consequently there was liability to capital gains tax for the Assessment Year 2002-03

High Court Of Madras G.H. Reddy & Associates vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section 45(4), 187(2) Asst. Year 2002-03 T.S. Sivagnanam & V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, JJ. Tax Case (Appeal) No. 1106 of 2008 16th November, 2018 Counsel Appeared: R.Sivaraman for the Petitioner.: V.Pushpa, Junior Standing Counsel, M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel for the Respondent. T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J. …

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

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, 153 Asst. Year 2008-09, 2009-2010 Ramesh Ranganathan & Kongara Vijaya Lakshmi, JJ. W.T.A. No.2 of 2017, W.T.A. Nos.1, 2 AND 3 of 2018 W.T.A.No.2 of 2017 11th October, 2018 Counsel Appeared: Challa Gunaranjan, Learned Counsel for …

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?

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Harbour View (Now Known As Harbour View Residency Pvt. Ltd.) Section 2(47), 45, 48, 132 Asst. Year 1999-2000 K.Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ. ITA.No. 33 of 2010 24th September, 2018 Counsel Appeared: PKR Menon, Sr. Counsel, GOI (TAXES) Adv., JOSE JOSEPH, SC, for the Income Tax.: T.M. Sreedharan (SR.), …

Calcutta H.C : if the mortgage had been created by the previous owner and the assessee after inheriting the same had discharged the mortgage debt, the amount paid by the assessee for the purpose of clearing off the mortgage could be claimed as a part of cost of acquisition under Section 48 and Section 49 read with Section 55(2)

High Court Of Calcutta CIT vs. Aditya Kumar Jajodia Section 55(1)(b)(2)(ii), 45, 47, 49 Sanjib Banerjee & Abhijit Gangopadhyay, JJ. ITAT No. 114 of 2014 GA No. 2277 of 2014 20th July, 2018 Counsel appeared: Md. Nizamuddin, Adv. J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. for the Petitioner THE COURT Two questions have been raised by the Revenue …

Calcutta H.C : Possession of the land owned by the assessee was made over to a developer pursuant to an agreement of February 7, 2007 for construction being undertaken thereon, in view of amended Section 2(47)(v)

High Court Of Calcutta Pr.CIT vs. Infinity Infotech Parks Limited Section 2(47)(v), 45, 263, 53, 53A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Asst. Year 2007-08 Sanjib Banerjee & Abhijit Gangopadhyay, JJ. ITAT No. 225 of 2015 GA No. 4049 of 2015 GA No. 4050 of 2015 18th July, 2018 Counsel appeared: Md. Nizamuddin, Adv. J. P. …

Bombay H.C : The transfer within the meaning of Section 2(47)(v) had taken place only in 2002-03 assessment year ignoring the development agreement by way of Power of Attorney, based on which transfer of possession and development have taken place much earlier and when the order of the Tribunal is contrary to facts and law

High Court Of Bombay Dr. Joao Souza Proenca vs. ITO, Ward -2(2), Panaji Section 2(47), 45 and 147 Assessment year 2002-03 Shantanu Kemkar And Nutan D. Sardessai, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 5 And 6 Of 2012 January  17, 2018 JUDGMENT Shantanu Kemkar, J. – These Appeals are filed under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 …

S.C : Where for want of permissions, entire transaction of development of land envisaged in Joint Development Agreement (JDA) fell through, there would be no profit or gain which arose from transfer of capital asset, which could be brought to tax under section 45, read with section 48

Supreme Court Of India CIT Vs. Balbir Singh Maini Section 2(47),45, 48 Assessment year 2007-08 R.F. Nariman And Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Jj. Civil Appeal Nos. 15619 To 156677 Of 2017 October 4, 2017 JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J. – Leave granted. 2. This judgment shall dispose of a batch of civil appeals, as learned counsel appearing for …

Kerala H.C : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the land as capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

High Court Of Kerala Synthite Industries Ltd. vs. CIT Section 45 Asst. Year 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Antony Dominic & Shircy V., JJ. ITA No. 154 of 2015 31st August, 2017 Counsel Appeared: O.K.Narayanan & P. Rejinark for the Appellant. : P.K.R.Menon, Sr. Counsel, GOI(TAXES) & Jose Joseph, SC, for income tax for the Respondent. …
Malcare WordPress Security