Home ›

Search Results For: R. Sudhakar J

This section is now closed. Click here for new judgements


Posted on by editor — 2 Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: November 11, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: November 27, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2000-01
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 158BD: Issue of notice u/s 158BD to the non-searched party has to be within the two years period given to the AO for completion of block assessment u/s 158BE(1)

The AO passed an order u/s 158BC in the case of Sree Gokulam Chits and Finance Company Limited. After the expiry of two years, he initiated proceedings u/s 158BD against the assessee. The Tribunal struck down the s. 158BD proceedings …

CIT vs. V. D. Muralidharan (Madras High Court) Read More »

Posted on by editor — No Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: , ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: November 3, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: November 14, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2009-10
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 2(47)(vi): A Power of Attorney which does not enable enjoyment of property does not result in a "transfer". CBDT Circular No.495 dated 22.9.1987 reads more into s. 2(47)(vi) than warranted

(i) There is no transfer to or enabling enjoyment of property in favour of the assessee in any manner and therefore, sub-clause (vi) of Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act does not get attracted. Clause 21 of the power …

CIT vs. C. Sugumaran (Madras High Court) Read More »

Posted on by editor — No Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S): ,
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS: ,
COUNSEL:
DATE: November 3, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: November 12, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2001-2002 to 2007-2008
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
Admission of undisclosed income by assessee constitutes good evidence. Loose sheets found during search can be relied upon

(i) With regard to the undisclosed income of Rs.52,73,920/- supported by printouts, in the sworn statement dated 29.8.2006, the assessee says that he had separate business income which was not included in his income tax returns. Therefore, admission of undisclosed …

B. Kishore Kumar vs. DCIT (Madras High Court) Read More »

Posted on by editor — No Comments ↓
COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: September 15, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: November 7, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY: 2008-09
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 54EC: Assessee is eligible for deduction of Rs.1 Crore in respect of investment of Rs.50 Lakhs made in two different financial years. Proviso to s. 54EC seeking to curb this has effect from AY 2015-16

(i) On a plain reading of Section 54EC(1) of the Act it is clear that it restricts the time limit for the period of investment after the property has been sold to six months. There is no cap on the …

CIT vs. C. Jaichander (Madras High Court) Read More »

Posted on by editor — 1 Comment ↓
COURT:
CORAM: ,
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: August 18, 2014 (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: October 6, 2014 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:
S. 54F amendment by Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 is prospective & w.e.f. 01.04.2015

The above-said amendment to Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, which will come into effect only from 01.04.2015, makes it very clear that the benefit of Section 54F of the Income Tax Act will be applicable to constructed, one …

CIT vs. V. R. Karpagam (Madras High Court) Read More »