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

        Tribunal grants deduction under Section 54G and resolves Section 14A issue for assessee

        The Spunpipe and Construction Co. Versus The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda and The DCIT, Circle-4, Baroda

        The Spunpipe and Construction Co. Versus The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda and The DCIT, Circle-4, Baroda - TMI Issues Involved:
        1. Denial of deduction under Section 54G of the Income-tax Act.
        2. Additions made under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act.

        Detailed Analysis:

        Issue 1: Denial of Deduction under Section 54G of the Income-tax Act

        Facts and Background:
        The assessee appealed against the orders of the CIT(A)-III, Baroda, which denied the deduction under Section 54G for the Assessment Years (A.Y.) 2008-09 and 2009-10. The common grievance was the denial of deduction u/s. 54G related to capital gains from the sale of factory land. The land, initially rented since 1945, was purchased in 1994 and partially converted into stock-in-trade in 2006. The assessee entered into an agreement with a developer for the converted land and sold 42 plots in A.Y. 2008-09.

        Assessee’s Claim:
        The assessee claimed that the capital gains were utilized for purchasing new plant and machinery and constructing a factory building in a rural area, fulfilling the conditions of Section 54G. The assessee argued that the transfer date should be considered as the date of sale, not the date of conversion.

        Revenue’s Stand:
        The A.O. denied the deduction, asserting that the land was converted into stock-in-trade and not used for industrial purposes. The A.O. also noted that the acquisition of new assets should be within one year before or three years after the transfer date, which the assessee allegedly did not comply with.

        Tribunal’s Findings:
        The Tribunal considered three key facts:
        1. Whether the impugned land was a capital asset used in the business of an industrial undertaking.
        2. The correct date of transfer.
        3. Eligibility for deduction under Section 54G.

        Legal Provisions:
        Section 54G provides for deduction if the capital gains from the transfer of a capital asset used for industrial purposes in an urban area are utilized within specified periods for shifting the industrial undertaking to a non-urban area.

        Key Observations:
        - The Tribunal noted that capital gains should be utilized within the specified period from the date of sale, not the date of conversion.
        - The assessee utilized the capital gains for purchasing new plant and machinery and constructing a factory building in a non-urban area, fulfilling the mandatory conditions.
        - The Tribunal referred to CBDT Circular No. 791, which clarifies that the period for making investments should be from the date the stock-in-trade is sold.
        - The Tribunal emphasized a liberal interpretation of Section 54G as a beneficial provision.

        Conclusion:
        The Tribunal concluded that the assessee fulfilled the conditions for deduction under Section 54G and directed the A.O. to allow the deduction. The appeals for both A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10 were allowed in favor of the assessee.

        Issue 2: Additions Made under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act

        Facts and Background:
        For A.Y. 2009-10, the A.O. noticed tax-exempt income and computed disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee had already disallowed a sum suo motu, but the A.O. added an additional amount.

        Assessee’s Claim:
        The assessee argued that the investments were made from own funds, not borrowed funds, and thus no interest expenses were incurred.

        Revenue’s Stand:
        The A.O. computed the disallowance, including interest expenses, and added the difference to the assessee’s income.

        Tribunal’s Findings:
        - The Tribunal noted a contradiction in the A.O.’s computation, where the A.O. acknowledged no direct expenditure relating to tax-exempt income but still included interest expenses.
        - The Tribunal found the additional disallowance of interest expenses uncalled for and directed the A.O. to delete the additional amount.

        Conclusion:
        The Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal, directing the deletion of the additional disallowance under Section 14A. The grievance for A.Y. 2009-10 was resolved in favor of the assessee.

        Final Order:
        The appeals of the assessee were allowed, and the order was pronounced in open court on 22-06-2016.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found