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.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
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
  • 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

        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>Court Rules Establishment Expenses Not Deductible; Solatium & Balancing Charge Taxable</h1> The court held that the establishment expenses claimed by the assessee for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63 were not deductible as the legal ... Balancing Charge, Legal Fiction, State Electricity Board Issues Involved:1. Deduction of establishment expenses for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63.2. Taxability of solatium of Rs. 1,89,000 received by the assessee.3. Liability to balancing charge under section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1962-63.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deduction of Establishment Expenses:- Facts: The assessee claimed deduction of Rs. 47,917 and Rs. 55,292 for the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63, respectively, arguing that these expenses were incurred during the negotiation period with the Board and should be allowed under commercial expediency.- Income-tax Officer's View: The claim was rejected on the grounds that the assessee's business had ceased with the termination of the licence, and no expenditure could be allowed unless the business was being carried on during the relevant accounting years.- Appellate Authorities' View: Both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision, stating that the legal fiction under section 41(2) was only for taxing the balancing charge and not for allowing expenses.- Court's Decision: The court agreed with the Tribunal, emphasizing that the legal fiction created under section 41(2) is limited to taxing the balancing charge and cannot be extended to allow the deduction of expenses. The court cited the principle that a legal fiction should be limited to the purpose for which it was created. Thus, the expenses incurred in the relevant accounting years were not deductible.2. Taxability of Solatium of Rs. 1,89,000:- Facts: The assessee received a solatium of Rs. 1,89,000 from the Board and claimed it as a casual or non-recurring receipt or a capital receipt, arguing it should not be taxable.- Income-tax Officer's View: The solatium was considered part of the sale proceeds of the assets and thus taxable.- Appellate Authorities' View: Both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal confirmed the Income-tax Officer's decision, holding that the solatium was part of the sale price and taxable under section 41(2).- Court's Decision: The court referred to the decision in Sonepat Light Power and General Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, which held that the solatium should be included in the sale price for the purpose of section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Consequently, the court ruled that the solatium of Rs. 1,89,000 is part of the sale price of the assets for determining liability under section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Liability to Balancing Charge under Section 41(2):- Facts: The assessee argued that the balancing charge of Rs. 5,95,218 became due and payable on December 6, 1959, when the undertaking vested in the Board, and thus should be taxed in the assessment year 1960-61, not 1962-63.- Income-tax Officer's View: The balancing charge was taxable in the assessment year 1962-63 as the purchase price was determined and received in March 1962.- Appellate Authorities' View: Both the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision, stating that the balancing charge was taxable in the year it was ascertained and received.- Court's Decision: The court followed the Delhi High Court's decision in P.C. Gulati, Voluntary Liquidator, Panipat Electric Supply Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, which held that the moneys payable become due when they are ascertained. Since the purchase price was ascertained in March 1962, the balancing charge was rightly taxable in the assessment year 1962-63. The court rejected the alternative contention that it should have been taxed in the assessment year 1960-61 under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as the amount was not ascertained by then.Conclusion:- Question 1: The expenses incurred during the assessment years 1961-62 and 1962-63 are not deductible.- Question 2: The solatium of Rs. 1,89,000 is part of the sale price of the assets and taxable under section 41(2).- Question 3: The balancing charge of Rs. 5,95,218 is taxable in the assessment year 1962-63.The assessee is liable for costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found