Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.24 seconds)
Nandi Steels Ltd.,, Bangalore vs Assessee on 17 October, 2011 cites

C.I.T vs Express Newspapers Ltd on 11 January, 1994

He submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Express Newspapers Ltd., cited supra, was considered by the subsequent bench of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd., cited supra and after taking into consideration of the same, it has been held that the break up of income under different head is only for the purpose of computation of total income and it does not cease to be income from the business.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 117 - B P Reddy - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Andhra ... vs The Cocanada Bank Ltd. Kakinada on 2 April, 1965

He submitted that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Express Newspapers Ltd., cited supra, was considered by the subsequent bench of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd., cited supra and after taking into consideration of the same, it has been held that the break up of income under different head is only for the purpose of computation of total income and it does not cease to be income from the business.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 127 - Full Document

M/S. Killick Nixon & Company vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay on 5 May, 1967

The AO furnished the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment to the assessee. In the proceedings u/s 143(3) read with Sec.148 of the IT Act, the AO held that the brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation cannot be set off against the income from capital gains. He observed that the assessee has sold the land situated at Tumkur road along with the building and bore well which were all used for the business. Taking note of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s Killick Nixon & Co., Vs CIT reported in 66 ITR 714(SC), wherein it was held that only income which is earned by carrying on business is entitled to be set off, he held that the carry forward business loss cannot be set off against the income from capital gains, as it is against the provisions of law. He also observed that the assessee has admitted the profit and sale of land etc. s 3 ITA No.1546(B)2008 (SB) as long term capital gains and offered to tax at the rate of 20%. He accordingly, computed the income of the assessee.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 31 - J C Shah - Full Document
1   2 Next