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>Transfer of BOPP Films Business as Slump Sale Upheld, Capital Gains Taxed</h1> <h3>The Supreme Industries Limited Versus The ACIT, CC-29, Mumbai</h3> The Supreme Industries Limited Versus The ACIT, CC-29, Mumbai - TMI Issues Involved:1. Taxation of capital gains arising from the transfer of BOPP Films undertaking.2. Computation of deduction under Section 80HHC by reducing 90% of certain receipts from business profits.3. Deduction in respect of corporate dividend tax.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Taxation of Capital Gains:The primary grievance of the assessee was the taxation of capital gains amounting to Rs. 10,30,06,590/- under Section 50B read with Section 2(42C) of the Income Tax Act, arising from the transfer of the BOPP Films undertaking to Xpro India Ltd. (XIL). The assessee initially reported this amount as short-term capital gains but later retracted, arguing that the transfer was not a slump sale as defined under Section 2(42C). The assessee contended that individual values were assigned to assets and liabilities, thus disqualifying the transaction as a slump sale. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected this argument, stating that the Business Transfer Agreement (BTA) indicated a lump-sum consideration for the entire undertaking, and the assignment of individual values was merely for ascertaining changes in value during the interim period. The AO cited the Bombay High Court's decision in Premier Automobile Ltd. vs. ITO and the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench's decision in Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd., concluding that the transaction was indeed a slump sale. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the AO's decision, noting that the BOPP undertaking was sold for a lump-sum amount along with all its assets and liabilities, thus satisfying the criteria for a slump sale. The Tribunal affirmed the lower authorities' decisions, emphasizing that the assignment of individual values to net current assets was for practical reasons and did not alter the nature of the transaction as a slump sale.2. Computation of Deduction under Section 80HHC:The second issue pertained to the computation of deduction under Section 80HHC by reducing 90% of sundry receipts, including the sale of empty bags, cartons, octroi/BPT/insurance premium, and excise/sales-tax refunds from business profits. The Tribunal referred to its decision in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 1998-99, where it was directed that net income not assessable under Section 28 should be excluded from business profits for Section 80HHC. The Tribunal instructed the AO to re-examine the issue, considering whether 90% of gross receipts or net receipts should be excluded and ensuring that sales tax and excise duty are not part of the total turnover. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh consideration in line with these principles.3. Deduction in Respect of Corporate Dividend Tax:The third issue regarding the deduction in respect of corporate dividend tax was not pressed by the assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) and was dismissed in limine.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the AO's decision on the taxation of capital gains under Section 50B, confirming that the transfer of the BOPP Films undertaking was a slump sale. For the computation of deduction under Section 80HHC, the issue was remanded to the AO for re-examination as per the Tribunal's earlier directions. The appeal concerning corporate dividend tax was dismissed as it was not pursued by the assessee. The appeal was partly allowed in terms indicated above, with the order pronounced on 29/04/2016.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found