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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2017 (8) TMI 1442 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        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

        High Court upholds Tribunal decisions, emphasizing genuineness of transactions, liability treatment, depreciation, and cessation assessments. The High Court dismissed the department's appeals on all issues, upholding the Tribunal's decisions. The court found no substantial question of law in the ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          High Court upholds Tribunal decisions, emphasizing genuineness of transactions, liability treatment, depreciation, and cessation assessments.

                          The High Court dismissed the department's appeals on all issues, upholding the Tribunal's decisions. The court found no substantial question of law in the department's contentions and relied on precedents that supported the Tribunal's rulings. The judgments emphasized the principles of proving the genuineness of transactions, the treatment of liabilities, and the conditions under which depreciation and cessation of liabilities are to be assessed.




                          Issues Involved:

                          1. Justification of deleting the addition made by AO by way of disallowance of depreciation claimed on hotel building.
                          2. Justification of deleting the addition made by the AO on account of cessation of liability under Section 41(1) of the I.T. Act.
                          3. Justification of deleting the additions made under Section 68 of the Act of unexplained cash credits.

                          Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Disallowance of Depreciation Claimed on Hotel Building:
                          The department challenged the Tribunal's decision to delete the addition of Rs. 43,05,806/- and Rs. 1,07,64,515/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) by way of disallowance of depreciation claimed on the hotel building. The AO contended that the related investment in the building was not explained and only bogus bills were arranged for construction expenses. The Tribunal, however, dismissed this addition, leading to the department's appeal.

                          The High Court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in K.M. Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CIT, which emphasized that once the income from leasing assets is treated as business income, depreciation on those assets should not be disallowed. The court also cited CIT vs. Kesaria Tea Co. Ltd., where it was held that unilateral actions by the assessee, such as writing off liabilities, do not necessarily mean that the liability ceased in the eye of law. Thus, the High Court found no substantial question of law in the department's appeal and dismissed it.

                          2. Cessation of Liability under Section 41(1) of the I.T. Act:
                          The department also contested the deletion of Rs. 1,45,45,000/- made by the AO on account of cessation of liability under Section 41(1) of the I.T. Act. The Tribunal had ruled in favor of the assessee, leading to the department's appeal.

                          The High Court referred to the decision in CIT vs. Lovely Exports (P) Ltd., which stated that if share application money is received by the assessee-company from alleged bogus shareholders, the department is free to re-open their individual assessments. The court also cited the case of CIT vs. T.V. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd., which held that if an amount is received in the course of a trading transaction and becomes the assessee's own money, it should be treated as income. The High Court found that the loan taken was always treated as a capital liability and if wiped out, it should naturally go as wiping out the capital liability. Consequently, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the appeal.

                          3. Unexplained Cash Credits under Section 68:
                          The department challenged the Tribunal's decision to delete the additions made under Section 68 of the Act for unexplained cash credits, where the assessee could not discharge the burden of proving the creditworthiness of creditors and genuineness of transactions.

                          The High Court referred to the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s VTC Leasing & Finance Ltd., where it was held that if the share application money is received from alleged bogus shareholders, the department can re-open their individual assessments. The court found no infirmity with the Tribunal's judgment, stating that the issue was squarely covered by previous decisions and upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the department's appeal.

                          Conclusion:
                          The High Court dismissed the department's appeals on all issues, upholding the Tribunal's decisions. The court found no substantial question of law in the department's contentions and relied on precedents that supported the Tribunal's rulings. The judgments emphasized the principles of proving the genuineness of transactions, the treatment of liabilities, and the conditions under which depreciation and cessation of liabilities are to be assessed.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found