Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 44 (4.77 seconds)
Documents citing Topandas Kundanmal vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat on 18 March, 1976

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Motichand Virpal Shah. on 31 December, 1985

According to me the learned Third Member hearing the miscellaneous application has virtually overruled the unanimous finding in the original order of the Tribunal that according to the ratio of the Gujarat High Court decision in Topandas Kundanmals case (supra) compensation is chargeable to tax in the year of transfer irrespective of whether section 155(7A) applies or not. It is not possible or necessary to consider whether such a finding is correct or not because if it is not a correct view in law it can only be corrected by appropriate proceedings such as by way of reference application.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Bharat Iron And Steel Industries on 28 January, 1992

In Topandas Kundanmal v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 237 (Guj), it was held that if an assessee has got an inchoate right and has not acquired any vested right to enhanced or additional compensation over and above what has been offered to him by the Land Acquisition Officer, it cannot be said that he has a vested and complete right as to the interest on such amount. It is only when the amount of compensation is adjudicated upon by the court and it is only when the court awards interest on such enhanced amount of compensation that the assessee has an enforceable right to the principal amount of compensation as well as to the interest. Relying on the said decision, a similar view was taken in Addl.
Gujarat High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 67 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

Visnagar Taluka Audyogik Sahakari ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 22 September, 1999

9. In view of this decision, it is contended before us that mere receipt of refund would not attract the provisions contained in section 41(1) as the proceedings were pending with regard to the refund. This court in the case of Topandas Kundanmal v. CIT (1978) 114 ITR 237 (Guj) has held that, if an assessee has got an inchoate right and has not acquired any vested right to enhance or additional compensation over and above what has been offered to him by the Land Acquisition Officer, it cannot be said that he has a vested and complete right as to the interest on such amount. It is only when the amount of compensation is adjudicated upon by the court and it is only when the court awards interest on such enhanced amount of compensation that the assessee has an enforceable right to the principal amount of compensation as well as interest. In the instant case, after the Apex Court disposed of the matter raising real and substantial questions, it can be said that the adjudication attained finality.
Gujarat High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 9 - Full Document

Income-Tax Officer vs Arvind Narain on 25 June, 1982

We may humbly submit that while deciding the judgment in the case of Topandas Kundanmal (supra) against which Special Leave Petition filed by the Commissioner was dismissed by the Supreme Court, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mrs. Khorshed Shapoor Chenai (supra), was not before their Lordships of the Gujarat High Court. We, thus, modify the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) accordingly, and direct that only that amount of interest on enhanced compensation is to be brought to tax in this year which actually pertains to the relevant previous year pertaining to this assessment year.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Visnagar Taluka Audyogik Sahakari ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 22 September, 1999

17. In view of this decision, it is contended before us that mere receipt of refund would not attract the provisions contained in s. 41(1) of the Act as the proceedings were pending with regard to the refund. This Court in the case of Topandas Kundanmal vs. CIT TC 39R.662 has held that, if an assessee has got an inchoate right and has not acquired any vested right to enhanced or additional compensation over and above what has been offered to him by the Land Acquisition Officer, it cannot be said that he has a vested and complete right as to the interest on such amount. It is only when the amount of compensation is adjudicated upon by the Court and it is only when the Court awards interest on such enhanced amount of compensation that the assessee has an enforceable right to the principal amount of compensation as well as interest. In the instant case, after the apex Court disposed of the matter raising real and substantial questions, it can be said that the adjudication attained finality.
Gujarat High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - P Majmudar - Full Document

Shri Someshwar Sahakari Sakhar ... vs Income-Tax Officer on 22 September, 1984

36. The precarious nature of the right of the present appellants to the excess amounts received by them under the orders of the Court, pending final adjudication of the dispute by the Court, will be clear when we study the facts of the case set out in the case of Topandas Kundanmal (supra) at pages 239 to 241. In that case, as a result of the judgment of the Gujarat High Court, in the land acquisition case, the award of the civil judge (S.D.) enhancing the compensation was set aside by the High Court in the appeal preferred by the State Government and the assessee became liable to repay to the State Government the amount of Rs. 50,000 with interest at 4 per cent per annum from the date of withdrawal to the date of such repayment. In that case, the State Government had deposited the compensation amount in the High Court and the assessee was allowed to withdraw only a portion, i.e., Rs. 50,000 out of it, on furnishing solvent security. It is on these facts, their Lordships of the Gujarat High Court held that it is only when the amount of compensation is adjudicated upon by the Court and it is only when the Court awards interest on such enhanced amount of compensation, that the assessee has an enforceable right to the principal amount of compensation as well as to the interest. Their Lordships further held that if an assessee has got an inchoate right and has not acquired any vested right to enhanced or additional compensation over and above what has been offered to him by the Land Acquisition Officer, it cannot be said that he has a vested and complete right as to the interest on such amount. This case illustrates the true nature of the additional amounts paid under orders of the Court in terms of the consent order and received by the present appellants before us. It shows that this extra amount is paid as a provisional or interim payment pending the final decision of the Court on the price payable to the assessees. It does not have or get the element of a revenue or income or trading receipt till the final decision of the Court.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 37 - Cited by 9 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next