Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

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 βœ•
  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
β•³
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
βœ•
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close βœ•
🔎 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
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
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 statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----

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

        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

        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. Here it shows just a few of many results. To view list of all cases mentioning this section, Visit here

        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

        <h1>Tribunal Reverses CIT Order, Upholds ITO Decision on Trust Loss Adjustment</h1> The Tribunal reversed the CIT's order under section 263, restoring the ITO's decision. It held that the ITO's order adjusting the trust's loss from the ... Assessment Order, Orders Prejudicial To Interests Issues Involved:1. Whether the order passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) on 28-07-1986 was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.2. Whether the loss determined in the case of the trust for earlier years can be carried forward and set off against the income of the trust for the assessment year 1984-85.3. Whether the beneficiaries should have been taxed on their shares of the profits without any adjustment on account of losses of earlier years.4. Whether the CIT was justified in invoking section 263 of the Income-tax Act to revise the ITO's order.Detailed Analysis:1. Erroneous and Prejudicial to the Interest of Revenue:The CIT initiated proceedings under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, concluding that the ITO's order dated 28-07-1986 was 'prima facie erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.' The CIT argued that the loss allowed to be set off in computing the income of the appellant trust was incorrect, as the loss computed for earlier years was not to be carried forward for set off against the income of subsequent years. The CIT emphasized that the department had elected to assess the beneficiaries' income in the assessment year 1981-82, and this election could not be varied in subsequent years. Hence, the ITO's failure to charge the beneficiaries to tax on their shares of the profits without adjusting for earlier years' losses rendered the order erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue.2. Carry Forward and Set Off of Loss:Sri Dastur, representing the appellant, argued that the ITO had determined the loss in the case of the trust for earlier years and directed that such loss should be carried forward. He pointed out that the directions to carry forward the loss were not the subject matter of appeal in earlier years. Therefore, unless the orders for the earlier years were modified, the CIT could not revise the order for the assessment year 1984-85. He cited section 80 of the Income-tax Act, which provides that no loss that has not been determined in pursuance of a return filed under section 139 shall be carried forward and set off. Since the loss was determined in the case of the trust, it could only be carried forward in the hands of the trust. The conditions laid down in sections 72 and 80 were satisfied, justifying the ITO's decision to set off the loss determined in earlier years against the income of the trust for the assessment year 1984-85.3. Taxation of Beneficiaries:The CIT contended that since the department had elected to assess the beneficiaries' income in the assessment year 1981-82, the beneficiaries should have been taxed on their shares of the profits for the assessment year 1984-85 without any adjustment for earlier years' losses. The CIT argued that the beneficiaries, being minors, could not have any loss computed under the Income-tax Act for earlier years, and thus, the entire profits for the assessment year 1984-85 should be taxable in their hands. Sri Dastur countered that the department could not change its stand and that the loss determined in the case of the trust should be carried forward and set off in the hands of the trust, not the beneficiaries.4. Justification of CIT's Invocation of Section 263:Sri Minocha, representing the department, argued that the trust could never be an assessee in its own right, and the real assessees were the beneficiaries. He emphasized that the right to carry forward and set off of loss is not inherent and is subject to conditions specified in sections 70, 71, 72, and 80. He cited various court decisions to support his argument that the ITO's order was erroneous and that the CIT was justified in invoking section 263. However, the Tribunal found that the conditions prescribed under sections 72 and 80 were satisfied in the present case, and the ITO's order was in accordance with the provisions of law. The Tribunal held that the CIT had jurisdiction to proceed under section 263 but concluded that the ITO's order was not erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.Conclusion:The Tribunal reversed the CIT's order under section 263, restored the ITO's order, and allowed the appeal of the assessee. The Tribunal concluded that the ITO's order dated 28-07-1986, which adjusted the loss of the assessment year 1983-84 against the profit of the assessment year 1984-85, was correct in law and not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal emphasized that the conditions laid down in sections 72 and 80 were fulfilled, and the trust was entitled to carry forward and set off the loss determined in earlier years against its income for the assessment year 1984-85.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found