Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s decision on gifts classification and taxation, dismissing revenue's appeals.</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-11, New Delhi Versus Mayawati</h3> Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-11, New Delhi Versus Mayawati - [2010] 42 SOT 59 (DELHI) Issues Involved:1. Quashing of assessment due to non-service of notice under section 143(2).2. Genuineness of gifts received by the assessee.3. Taxability of gifts received under section 56(2)(v) and section 28.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Quashing of Assessment Due to Non-Service of Notice under Section 143(2):The CIT(A) quashed the assessment for the assessment year 2004-05 on the ground that the mandatory notice under section 143(2) was not served within the prescribed period. The department argued that the notice was issued and sent by registered post within the statutory period. However, the CIT(A) found discrepancies in the department's records and concluded that the notice was not served on time. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing the importance of proper record-keeping and the procedural requirements for issuing notices.2. Genuineness of Gifts Received by the Assessee:For the assessment year 2004-05, the CIT(A) held that the gifts amounting to Rs. 8,29,25,107 were genuine, based on the evidence provided by the assessee. The Tribunal upheld this finding, noting that similar issues in earlier years had been resolved in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal referred to its previous order in the assessee's case for the assessment year 2003-04, where it was held that the gifts were genuine, considering the identity and capacity of the donors and the voluntary nature of the gifts.3. Taxability of Gifts Received under Section 56(2)(v) and Section 28:For the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07, the assessee received gifts, some of which were offered for taxation under section 56(2)(v) as 'income from other sources' while others were claimed as non-taxable. The Assessing Officer taxed the gifts up to Rs. 25,000 under section 28 as 'income from business or profession,' arguing that these were vocational receipts due to the assessee's political activities. The CIT(A) disagreed, holding that the gifts were personal in nature, received on the occasion of the assessee's birthday, and should be treated uniformly under section 56(2)(v). The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the gifts were given out of personal admiration and love for the assessee's social work and not for any political quid pro quo.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeals for all three assessment years, upholding the CIT(A)'s decisions on quashing the assessment due to non-service of notice, accepting the genuineness of the gifts, and treating the gifts uniformly under section 56(2)(v) rather than splitting them into different heads of income. The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough examination of the facts, evidence, and relevant case laws, ensuring that the gifts were correctly classified and taxed according to the legislative intent.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found