S.56: Income from other sources- Interest income on fixed deposit is held to be assessable as income from other sources [ S.28(i) ]
Nilesh Janardan Thakur v. ITO (2018) 168 ITD 143 /192 TTJ 786 (Mum) (Trib.)S.56: Income from other sources- Interest income on fixed deposit is held to be assessable as income from other sources [ S.28(i) ]
Nilesh Janardan Thakur v. ITO (2018) 168 ITD 143 /192 TTJ 786 (Mum) (Trib.)S. 56 : Income from other sources – Redeemable non-cumulative preference shares (RNCPS) cannot be excluded from ambit of section 56(2)(viib)- In case of issue of redeemable non-cumulative preference shares (RNCPS) at premium, conclusion of valuer that 10 per cent discount factor was appropriate, was to be upheld as it was based on proper comparable for bench marking [ S.56(2)(viib), Rule 11UA(c)(c), ]
Microfirm Capital (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2018) 168 ITD 301/62 ITR(T) 109/192 TTJ 431// 164 DTR 35 (Kol) (Trib.)S.56: Income from other sources- Agricultural income –Consideration was not shown to avoid payment of stamp duty-Consideration was held to be assessable as income from other sources and not as agricultural income, however levy of concealment penalty was held to be not justified [ S. 271(1) (c ) ]
ACIT v. Mohinder Singh (Chd.)(Trib) www.itatonline.org Malkit Singh v. ITO (Chd.)(Trib) www.itatonline.orgS. 56: Income from other sources –Relative – Hindu Undivided Family (HUF)- Gift by the mother of the Karta of the HUF, to the HUF is liable to be taxed as the mother can not be considered as member of HUF – Revision was held to be justified – Assessee was directed to produce valuation report as per rule 11UA . [ S. 2(31 ), 56(2)(vii) ,263 ]
Subodh Gupta (HUF) v. PCIT ( 2018) 169 ITD 60 /166 DTR 153 / 193 TTJ 442(Delhi)(Trib) www.itatonline.orgS. 56 : Income from other sources -Under valuation of shares -The “fair market value” of shares acquired has to be determined by the taking the book values of the underlying assets and not their market values [S. 56(2)(viia) R.11UA ]
Minda SM Tecnocast Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT ( 2018) 170 ITD 12 (Delhi)(Trib) , www.itatonline.orgS. 55 : Capital gains – Cost of improvement – Cost of acquisition – Approved valuer’s report itself is a piece of evidence and Act does not require that opinion of approved valuer should have been supported with further evidence in shape of circle rate or exemplar sale deeds etc, value as on 1-4-1981 on the basis of approved valuer was held to be valid [ S. 45, 55(2)(b)(ii) ]
PCIT v. Vidhi Agarwal ( Smt.) (2018) 252 Taxman 395 (All.)(HC)S. 54B : Capital gains – Land used for agricultural purposes – Investment in the name of wife was held to be entitle to exemption .The word used are the assessee has to invest , it is not specified that it is to be in the name of assessee. Expenditure on bore wells and stamp duty to be taken in to consideration while considering the exemption [ S. 45, 263 ]
Laxmi Narayan v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 117/( 2019) 306 CTR 361 (Raj) (HC) Shravan lal Meena L/H of Late Bhagwanta Meena v.ITO (2018) 402 ITR 117/( 2019) 306 CTR 361 (Raj) (HC) Mahadev Balaji v .ITO (2018) 402 ITR 117 /( 2019) 306 CTR 361(Raj) (HC)S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence – Investment in residential house outside India was held eligible for exemption ( Prior to amendment with effect from 1-4-2015 by Finance (No. 2) ACT, 2014). [ S. 45, 54F ]
Dipankar Mohan Ghosh, In Re (2018) 401 ITR 129/ 301 CTR 42 /163 DTR 21 (AAR)S. 54: Capital gains-Profit on sale of property used for residence –Cost included furniture and fixtures –Exemption cannot be denied only on the ground that no claim was made in the return , if he is otherwise entitle to it .[ S.45 ]
Rajat B. Mehta v. ITO ( 2018)169 ITD 178/ 163 DTR 49/ 192 TTJ 307/ 62 ITR 334( Ahd)(Trib)S. 54: Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence – If entire consideration was paid with in three years the assessee is entitle to exemption [ S.45, 54F ]
Seema Sabharwal v. ITO (2018) 169 ITD 319/ 193 TTJ 128/ 163 DTR 253 (Chd)(Trib) , www.itatonline.org