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

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.
Post a Comment
Read more

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more