Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

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:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    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
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      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

        -

        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's decision on profit reduction & gift acceptance for AY 2003-04. Revenue appeal dismissed. -04</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Income Tax-19 Versus Sabina Khan</h3> The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision regarding profit reduction and gift acceptance for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The Court found the ... Reduction in profit - ITAT upholding the decision of the CIT(Appeals) in reducing the profit of the assessee from 30% to 10% in respect of profit from M/s.Lameens Entertainment and from 30% to 15% in the case of Dress Designer account - Held that:- Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, both, has reached the concurrent finding of fact that the profits has restricted to 10% of the gross receipts received from M/s.Lamee's Entertainment Factory, and on account of dress designing. This finding of fact has not been shown to be perverse or arbitrary. Guinness of gift - ITAT deleted addition - Capacity and creditworthiness of the donor who gifted ₹ 9.60,000/- to the assessee - Held that:- Gift of ₹ 9.60 lakhs which was received by the respondent-assessee from her sister in U.S.A. was found to be the gift given by close relative who was a capable donor on the basis of the evidence produced before the Authorities by the respondent-assessee. The aforesaid concurrent finding of the Authorities are finding of fact and have not been shown to be perverse or arbitrary in any manner. The conclusion reached by the Authorities under the Act are reasonable, we see no reason to interfere with the same - Decided against revenue. Issues:1. Challenge to the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding profit reduction and estimation of income.2. Capacity and creditworthiness of the donor for a gift received by the assessee.Analysis:1. The appellant, the Revenue, challenged the Tribunal's order concerning the reduction of profit and income estimation for the Assessment Year 2003-04. The first issue raised was whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the decision to reduce the profit of the assessee from 30% to 10% in the case of M/s. Lameens Entertainment and from 30% to 15% in the case of Dress Designer account. The Assessing Officer had estimated the profit based on gross receipts, disregarding claimed expenses, and added a gift amount to the assessee's income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. The respondent-assessee, engaged in dress designing and TV serial productions, did not attend the Assessing Officer's office despite notices. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) restricted the profit to 10% of gross receipts from Lameens Entertainment Factory and dress designing, considering unaccounted expenditures. The Commissioner also accepted the gift of Rs. 9.60 lakhs received from the assessee's sister, citing a compensation source. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order on all grounds, dismissing the Revenue's appeal.3. The Tribunal and the Commissioner reached a concurrent finding that the profit reduction and gift acceptance were reasonable based on evidence presented. The Tribunal found no perversity or arbitrariness in these decisions. The Authorities' conclusions were deemed reasonable, leading to the dismissal of questions (A) and (B) as they did not raise substantial legal issues. Question (C) regarding the admission of additional evidence by the CIT (Appeals) was dismissed as the Revenue did not raise this grievance before the Tribunal.4. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, finding no substantial legal questions raised by the Revenue's appeal. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found