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>High Court upholds Tribunal decision favoring assessee, emphasizing real income principle. No notional interest income assessed.</h1> <h3>Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Method Trading And Investment Ltd.</h3> Commissioner Of Income-Tax Versus Method Trading And Investment Ltd. - [2000] 246 ITR 588, 165 CTR 541, 109 TAXMANN 414 Issues Involved:1. Accrual of interest on loan advanced by the assessee-company.2. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Administration) u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Merger of the Income-tax Officer's order with the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order.4. Notional assessment of interest income.5. Real income principle and its applicability.Summary:1. Accrual of Interest on Loan Advanced:The Tribunal held that the accrual of interest on the loan advanced by the assessee-company to Shri Ambica Jute Mills Ltd. was not proper and deleted the accrued interest of Rs. 1,15,625 for the period from June 1, 1983, to August 31, 1983, from the total income of the assessee. The Tribunal also held that the interest accrued for the period from September 1, 1983, to March 31, 1984, should not be added to the assessee's income.2. Jurisdiction u/s 263:The Tribunal ruled that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Administration) had no basis for passing an order u/s 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that his order setting aside the assessment was not called for. The Tribunal found that there was no merger of the Income-tax Officer's order in the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order, and thus, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Administration) had jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act.3. Merger of Orders:The Tribunal rejected the assessee's contention that the order of the Income-tax Officer merged with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Tribunal distinguished the decision in Oil India Ltd. v. CIT [1982] 138 ITR 836, stating that the issue before the appellate authority was whether interest could be assessed in respect of the dishonoured hundis.4. Notional Assessment of Interest Income:The Tribunal held that no notional interest income could be assessed for the period from September 1, 1983, to March 31, 1984, as there was no contract or agreement for paying any interest or giving any loan after the maturity of the hundis. The Tribunal cited the case of Ananta Lal Sen v. CIT [1992] 107 CTR 113 (Cal) to support its decision.5. Real Income Principle:The Tribunal ruled that no real income accrued to the assessee in respect of the sum of Rs. 1,15,625 and deleted the addition. It emphasized that the income must accrue in the real sense and cannot be taxed merely because the assessee follows the mercantile system of accounting. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in State Bank of Travancore v. CIT [1986] 158 ITR 102, which reiterated that real income must be judged in light of the reality of the situation.Final Judgment:The High Court affirmed the Tribunal's decision, answering all questions in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue. The court upheld that no notional interest income could be assessed and emphasized the principle of real income.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found