Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (3.06 seconds)Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs General Investment Co. Ltd. on 5 May, 1980
18. Reliance was placed on behalf of the Revenue in the case of CIT v. General Investment Co. Ltd. . In our opinion, the principles laid down in this case has no application to the problem that has been raised in this reference. In that case the question was how the cost of acquisition of bonus shares was to be determined.
Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay on 31 October, 1966
19. The Supreme Court in that case clearly stated that the value of the capital assets of the assessee in that case included the right of renouncing the option to obtain new shares in favour of some other person.
Section 7 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 48 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 55A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Central), ... vs Anglo India Jute Mills Co. Ltd. on 9 June, 1980
13. The assessee also relied on a number of cases for the proposition that where the asset was self-created or self-generated, it did not have any cost of acquisition and in a case of that nature tax on capital gains could not be levied. For this proposition reliance was placed on the cases of CIT v. Anglo India Jute Mills Co. Ltd. [1981] 129 ITR 352 (Cal) and CIT v. v. General Investment Co. Ltd. ; but these are cases where the assessee by his own effort created a right and/or an asset and later sold away that right or asset for valuable consideration. But in the case before us the assessee has acquired debentures for valuable consideration. After holding the debentures for sometime the assessee has converted the debentures into shares. The shares have thereafter been sold in the market. It is not a case of creation of an asset by the assessee by his own effort as in the case of goodwill. It is a case of a straight forward transaction in capital assets resulting in profits. Therefore, it will not be right to say that in a case like this Section 45 is not attracted at all.
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1