Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 104 (1.12 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Dhanuka & Sons vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 19 April, 2011

R.G.P Moulds Pvt. Ltd, Kanpur vs Assessee on 28 August, 2013

In the case of Dhanuka and Sons Vs Commissioner of Income-tax (supra), the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court has held that it is for the assessee to show the source of acquisition of those shares by production of material that those were acquired from the funds available in the hands of the assessee at the relevant point of time without taking any loan and in absence of such material placed by the assessee, the authorities below can make a proportionate disallowance having regard to the total income from the explained source. The relevant observation of Hon'ble High Court is also extracted as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Lucknow Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gulshan Chemicals Ltd., New Delhi vs Assessee

(Extract from the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT (2011) 339 ITR 319 (Cal.) "In our opinion, the mere fact that these shares were old ones and not acquired recently is immaterial. It is for the assessee to show the source of acquisition of these shares by production of materials that those were acquired from the funds available in the hands of the assessee without taking the benefit of loan. If those shares were purchased from the amount taken in loan, even for instance, 5 or 10 years ago, it is for the assessee to show by the production of documentary evidence that such loaned amount had been already paid back and for the relevant assessment year, no interest is payable by the assessee for acquiring these old shares.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Uco Bank, Kolkata vs Assessee on 5 October, 2016

This third member decision placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs CIT reported in 339 ITR 319 (Cal) by stating that the principles laid down thereon would be applicable. We find that the assessee placed heavy reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in assessee's own case for the Asst Year 2009-10 wherein it was held that the provisions of section 14A of the Act are not applicable for investments held as stock in trade.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gmm Pfaulder Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs Assessee on 17 April, 2015

"16. Ground No.4 is against the deletion of disallowance of interest expenses of Rs.13,44,876/- u/s.14A of the Act. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the AO and placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT (supra) and decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Kalpataru Construction Overseas (P.)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Oswal Woollen Mills Ltd., Ludhiana vs Addl. Cit, Ludhiana on 22 July, 2022

• Umesh Trehan in ITA No. 1022/Chd/2012 (Chd Trib) • Vishal Coaters Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 281 & 282/Chd/2013 (Chd Trib) • CIT Vs. Smt. Leena Ramchandran, 339 ITR 296 (Kerala) • Dhanuka & Sons Vs. CIT, 339 ITR 319 (Karnataka) 49 • ACIT Vs. M/s Kisco Casting, Proprietor Circle, M/s Khanna Iron and Steel Corpn Khanna in ITA No. 32/Chd/2011 (Chd Trib) dt. 26/06/2011 • M/s Jamna Auto Industries Ltd. Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 438/Chd/2011 dt. 04/01/2012 (Chd Trib) • DCIT Vs. M/s Jamna Auto Industries Ltd. in ITA No. 418/Chd/2011 dt. 04/01/2012 (Chd Trib) 23.3 The Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition made by the AO by observing in para 6.17 of the impugned order which read as under:
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 111 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Gmm Pfaulder Ltd.,, Ahmedabad vs Assessee on 10 January, 2014

16. Ground No.4 is against the deletion of disallowance of interest expenses of Rs.13,44,876/- u/s.14A of the Act. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the AO and placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT (supra) and decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Kalpataru Construction Overseas (P.)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S. Srf Limited, Gurgaon vs Dcit, New Delhi on 6 April, 2021

16. As has been brought to our attention that in the year under consideration, the reserve and surplus are much higher than the investments and further, investment made during the year is only Rs. 399.17 Lakhs (net Rs.299.00 Lakhs), while there is actual repayment of borrowings during the year to the extent of Rs.12,020 lakhs. Therefore, assessee's own funds are much more than investment and on the facts of the case it can be reasonably inferred that amount of investment made cannot be said to be made from borrowings but out of assessee's own funds. Thus, the contentions of CIT(A) that assessee has failed to establish the acquisition of shares and sources thereof by producing books of accounts and other documentary evidence by relying on the judgment of Calcutta High Court in case of Dhanuka & Sons v. CIT [2011] 339 ITR 319 (Cal) is erroneous. It is apparent from the facts submitted by the assessee before assessing officer as well as before CIT (A) from which one may reasonably infer that investments are not out of borrowings but from the assessee's own surplus funds.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 24 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Hsbc Invest Direct (India) Ltd ( ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 17 October, 2014

In the instant case, on the other hand, we have found ourselves unable to issue any finding of fact on the basis of the material on record, with the position of the law being amply clarified by the hon'ble high court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (supra), after considering the decision in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra), as also in Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT (supra), following it, that no presumption would obtain.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M/S Infosys Limited , Bangalore vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 31 January, 2023

Similarly, the decision of this Court in Tata Sons (supra) being Income Tax Appeal No.209 of 2001 produced before us, dismissed the appeal of the Revenue by order dated 2nd April, 2004 by merely following its order dated 23rd March, 1993 rejecting the Revenue's application for Reference under Section 256(2) of the Act. Thus, it also cannot be relied upon to decide the controversy.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 141 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Maruti Traders & Investors, Kolkata vs Acit, Circle - 31, Kolkata, Kolkata on 28 November, 2018

It was further submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs G K K Capital Markets Private Limited vide order dated 10.2.2017 had held that the provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D would not apply to shares held as stock in trade and in this judgement, the earlier decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs CIT (339 ITR 319) was analysed and considered. The ld CIT however ignored all the contentions of the assessee and proceeded to treat the order of the ld AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue u/s 263 of the Act and set aside the order with a direction to make necessary investigation on the issue of computation of disallowable expenditure under Rule 8D of the Rules and pass a fresh assessment order thereon.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 26 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next