Bombay High Court

Sec. 2(22)(E)

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)

/

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

Section 54F

Bombay H.C :The ITAT was justified in treating the gain arising from the sale of capital asset as Long Term Capital Gain without appreciating the fact that mere letter of allotment does not lead to creation of proper and effective right over the capital asset sought to be acquired, but only on execution of an agreement spelling out all the exact terms and conditions for acquisition

/

High Court Of Bombay Pr.CIT vs. Vembu Vaidyanathan Section 54F Asst. Year 2009-10 Akil Kureshi & M. S. Sanklecha, JJ.

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security