Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 56 (1.80 seconds)
Documents citing R. G. S. Naidu And Co vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax Andexcess ... on 14 December, 1960

Smt. Minal Nayan Shah, Ahmedabad vs The Pr, Cit-3, Ahmedabad on 15 October, 2019

In t his context, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C Venktas wami Naidu and Co Vs CIT [ 1959] 35 ITR 594 in whi ch the Hon'ble Apex Court held that in a given case, even an isolated I T A N o . 6 4 3 / Ah d / 1 9 [ S m t . M i n a l N a ya n S h a h v s . P r . C I T ] A . Y . 2 0 1 4 - 1 5 - 4 -
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 13 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Ito (It) 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs Adminstrator Of The Estate Of Late Mr. ... on 19 February, 2020

Facts of this case were somewhat similar to the facts involved in the case of G. Venkatswomi Naidu and Co Vs CIT (35 ITR 594)(SC). The judgment of the Bombay High Court in the assesses case was rendered after due consideration of this SC judgment which has laid down several tests for deciding whether the income derived from dealings in land is to be assessed as business income or capital gains. After examining the facts and circumstances in which land was acquired by FED and the manner in which it was held by the successors and considering the changed circumstances in which the holding of the land itself became difficult, the Bombay High Court had categorically held that the dealings of the Administrator with the inherited land were with a view to protect the corpus of the estate as well as interest of the beneficiary and therefore, could not be regarded as business or adventure in the nature of trade and therefore the income was assessable only under the head Capital Gain' and not under the head business".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 36 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

The Peerless Gen. Fin. & Inv. Co. Ltd., ... vs Dcit, Circle-3(1), Kolkata, Kolkata on 19 March, 2021

If the facts of the present case as discussed above are considered in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of R.K. Construction Co. (supra), we find that there was no error in the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue as alleged by the ld. Pr. CIT and the impugned order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT revising the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue is not sustainable. We accordingly set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT under section 263 on this issue and restore that of the Assessing Officer. Ground No. 4 of the assessee's appeal is accordingly allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 37 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Acit, Central Circle- 5, New Delhi vs Harvansh P Chawla, New Delhi on 26 April, 2021

(ii) That farther in respect of third requirement, i.e. "explanation of the assessee should be to the satisfaction of the A.O." the courts are of the view that the A.O cannot reject the 57 ITA Nos. 5857 & 5858/Del/2017 Harvansh P. Chawla assessee's explanation arbitrarily. Hon'ble Bombay High Court of Nagpur Bench in very old case of Naidu (RBNJ) vs CIT (1956) 29 ITR 194 (Nag) held that where the explanation furnished by an assessee about the amount credited is prima facie reasonable, the said explanation cannot be rejected on capricious and arbitrary grounds.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 55 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Manoj M. Shah vs Jt. Cit on 26 July, 2007

Section 32 incorporates a provision for proper recompense of such diminution in the vigor, strength, capability, etc., in order to give a correct picture of the profits from the business, profession etc. Depreciation is thus a measure of the effective life of an asset owing to use or obsolescence during the given period. The object of providing for depreciation is to spread the expenditure incurred on the asset over its effective lifetime, and the amount written off during an accounted period is intended to represent the proportion of such expenditure which has expired during the year. As held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in G.R. Govindamjulu Naidu v. CIT , allowable depreciation amount is a capital loss to the depreciable asset which must be replaced first to give a true or correct picture as otherwise there is bound to be a distorted picture in the Profit & Loss Account. The depreciation, in essence, represents an allowance to compensate for the assets capable of depreciating over a given period. If the assets are not capable of depreciating, the question of allowance in such a case will not arise.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 19 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Lakra Brothers on 24 April, 2006

The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of G.R Gobindarjulu Naidu v. CIT under the facts and circumstances of the case held that Section 2(6A)(e) cannot be invoked unless the legislature introduced available deeming provision to the fact that the joint family which is the beneficial owner of the shares shall be deemed to be the registered shareholder of the company.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 12 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next