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>Tribunal Adjusts Share Value, Excludes Interest Debit, Sets Sale Proceeds at Rs. 15 Lakhs</h1> The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, rejecting the claims for a reduction in the value of shares and the exclusion of bad debts but directing the ... - Issues Involved:1. Valuation of shares for wealth tax purposes.2. Inclusion of bad debts in the net wealth.3. Inclusion of disputed sale proceeds in the net wealth.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Valuation of Shares for Wealth Tax Purposes:The Wealth Tax Officer (WTO) included the value of shares held by the assessee in the net wealth at specific figures for the assessment years 1957-58 to 1961-62. The assessee claimed a 10% reduction in the aggregate value of shares due to various reasons, including the non-marketability of some shares, brokerage costs, and the fact that some shares were under attachment by the Income Tax Department.The Tribunal noted that for wealth-tax purposes, valuation is based on a hypothetical market where a willing seller and a willing purchaser come into contact. The Tribunal found no justification for the reduction claimed by the assessee. The assessee, despite holding a substantial number of shares, failed to provide concrete evidence showing that the listed price was excessive or unrealizable. The claim was based on assertions and probabilities without specific evidence. Therefore, the Tribunal rejected the assessee's claim for a reduction in the value of shares for all the years under appeal.2. Inclusion of Bad Debts in the Net Wealth:The assessee claimed that certain amounts due from Kohinoor Traders P. Ltd. had become bad and irrecoverable and should not be included in the net wealth. The amounts due were listed for each assessment year, and the assessee argued that the winding-up petition against Kohinoor Traders P. Ltd. indicated no chance of recovery.The Tribunal upheld the WTO's and the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) (CWT (A))'s decisions, noting that on the valuation dates relevant to the years under appeal, there was no evidence of the amounts being irrecoverable. The winding-up petition was filed only in 1964, and there was insufficient evidence to show that the debt had become of no value during the years under appeal. However, the Tribunal directed the deletion of interest amounts debited to the account of Kohinoor Traders P. Ltd. during these years, as no recovery had been made.3. Inclusion of Disputed Sale Proceeds in the Net Wealth:The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 25 lakhs, representing the balance of the sale price of Harinagar Cane Farm, which was disputed by Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. The company argued that no amount was due and payable, and any amount, if at all due, was barred by limitation. A suit for recovery was pending, and the assessee argued that this amount should not be included in the net wealth.The Tribunal found that the assessee had treated the amount as owing to the HUF and noted that the balance of Rs. 25 lakhs was shown as outstanding to the assessee. The Tribunal rejected the claim that the amount belonged to individuals rather than the HUF. However, the Tribunal acknowledged the substantial challenge to the assessee's title to the amounts due to ongoing litigation and rival claims. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to value this asset at Rs. 15 lakhs, considering the continuing litigation and the substantial interest of the assessee in the company.Conclusion:The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals, rejecting the claims for a reduction in the value of shares and the exclusion of bad debts but directing the deletion of interest amounts debited to Kohinoor Traders P. Ltd. The Tribunal also adjusted the value of the disputed sale proceeds, setting it at Rs. 15 lakhs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found