Skip to main content

Some recent judgments in Taxation & Company Matters

1.     Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Deepak Agarwal

        Where assessee P.A. Jose vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kottayamssee was not engaged in business of investment in shares, interest bearing funds invested in shares of related company to extend financial support, could not be said to be utilization for business purposes, and proportionate interest was liable to be disallowed.

         Held: Interest on funds invested in related companies to be disallowed if it doesn't serve any business purpose -IT


2.      Commissioner of Income-tax-IV vs. Sambhav Media Ltd.

       Computation for loss suffered by a party to contract is to be allowed, if not claimed twice

       Held: Writing off a debt is enough to claim deduction; assessee not required to prove if debt has actually gone bad -IT
3.    P.A. Jose vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kottayam
      Expenditure incurred for interior decoration on leased premises, for purpose of setting up a new business is capital in nature

        Held: Sum incurred on interior decoration in a leasehold premises for a newly set-up business is a capital exp. -IT


4.     Symantec Software Solutions (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax

      Typographical mistakes in order of Tribunal are liable to be rectified on an application made by assessee

     Held: Clerical mistakes in order of Tribunal rectifiable under section 254 -IT/ILT


5.   Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax - 3(2), Mumbai vs. Kotak Mahindra Investment Ltd.

    Where derivatives were held as stock-in-trade, rules applicable to valuation of stock-in-trade were to be applied and assessee's claim for mark-to-market loss was to be allowed

       Held: Mark-to-market loss allowed as derivatives were held by assessee as stock-in-trade -IT


6.   Meenadevi N. Gupta vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle -5, Surat

    Where transaction of shares of a listed company was done through Demat account as per recognized Stock Exchange quoted price, same cannot be held as non-genuine

    Held: Dealing in shares through Dmat account is a sacred route, additions under sec. 68 deleted -IT


7.  Ramshree Steels (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 6(2), Kanpur 

      Losses in speculation business cannot be set off against other business profits but business losses can be set off against profits in speculation 

     Held: Normal business losses can be set-off against profits of speculative as well as non-speculative business -IT

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there
Post a Comment
Read more

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t
Post a Comment
Read more

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even
Post a Comment
Read more