FROM THE PACKAGE

Sportking India Ltd. v. CCE

Section 83

Banking charges paid for discounting of letter of credit issued by buyer of goods located outsides India being related to export of goods, was eligible for refund…

Anasuya Mekala v. DCIT

Section 45

Where assessee sold certain land which was not in peaceful possession and paid certain amounts to occupants residing there and to village elders for settling dispute and claimed it as expenditure, AO was not justified…

Basaribanu Mohd. Rafiq Latiwala v. ITO

Section 54F

Where assessee claimed exemption under section 54F on property purchased by her, however, only partial payment was made by her before return filing and final amount was paid by her through cheque…

Sunil Prakash v. ACIT

Section 68

Where assessee was found to have purchased shares through a party alleged of providing bogus speculation profits/losses, however, shares were transacted through demat account and copies of related contract notes had been furnished…

K.V. Vijayaraghavan v. Dy. CIT

Section 54F

Where assessee demolished the newly acquired residential house instantly for the purpose of construction of a shopping complex, exemption under section 54F could not be granted…

ITO v. Deepak Shivram Pathare

Sections 45, 2(47), 50C

Where assessee had received sale consideration of land but land could not be transferred because assessee did not have possession of land, in such a case there was no transfer under section 2(47) and provision of capital gains could not be attracted…

Dy. CIT v. Nalwa Chrome (P) Ltd.

Section 28(iv), 41(1)

Advance against equity was not received in the normal course of business activity but towards contribution to equity capital of the assessee company. Hence, forfeiture thereof and crediting the same to capital reserves…

Samson Maritime Ltd v. CIT

Section 271(1)(c)

The law does not provide that when an assessee makes voluntary disclosure of his concealed income, he had to be absolved from penalty. Where assessee besides stating that there was mistake, had not offered any explanation…

KMV Collegiate Sr. Section School v. ITO

Section 10(23C)(iv)

Merely because governing body of assessee-school had objects of religious nature and assessee-school did not have any objects of its own, it could not be said that objectives of assessee were also partly religious in nature…

R.A. Himmatsinghka & Co. v. Asstt. CIT

Section 68

AO cannot look into source of source, i.e., of third party only, however assessee’s case was different as the party was closely connected with the assessee. Firm as a partner thereof assessee clearly failed to produce the sale deeds of the sale of…

   Recent CaseLaws

  Select Product   

# by DOJ more...