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

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...
Post a Comment
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
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