Cit vs ghanshyam huf
WebOn the facts and circumstances of the case, and with due respect to the decision relied by the CIT(A), appellant would like to rely upon the decision of Hon. Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Ghanshyam 4 ITA No.168/PUN/2016, A.Y. 2011-12 (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR-1(SC), dt.16-07-2009, which is logically as well as with reference to the scheme of ... WebJul 12, 2024 · In Rama Bai vs CIT, (1990) 181 ITR 400 (SC), dt. 8/11/1989, case of AY 1967-68-69, it is has held that – arrears of interest computed on delayed or enhanced …
Cit vs ghanshyam huf
Did you know?
WebMay 14, 2024 · The assessee’s land was acquired by the Government of Haryana and Land Acquisition Collector had announced award on 16.07.2007 fixing the market value of the … WebIn CIT Ghanshyam (HUF) [2009] 8 SCC 412, Interest earned under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act,which is on enhanced compensation, ... Following its earlier decision in …
WebJul 10, 2024 · The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 5. The Ld. counsel for the assessee read the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs.Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 182 Taxman 368 (SC) and argued that the amount received by the assessee is under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and not u/s 34 of … WebHUF of his son, his wife & minor children . For avoiding the clutches of sec 64 (1)(vi) such gifts better be avoided {CIT Vs Smt. T. Suryamani Kothavalsala (2003) 263 ITR 271} {CIT Vs S.N. Malhotra (1989) 178 ITR 380 (Cal)}3 • HUF can accept gifts from relations who may not be the member of the family.
WebCIT Vs Ghanshyam (HUF) 5. Bharat Earth Movers Vs CIT (2000) 245 ITR 428 (SC) 1. Grace Collis and others Vs CIT (2001) 248 ITR 323 (SC) 2. CIT Vs Madras Auto Services Ltd. (1998) 233 ITR 468 SC 3. CIT Vs National … WebThe Ld.CIT(A) has considered all the judgments mentioned in the present grounds of Appeal and since the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hari Singh & Ors …
WebNov 8, 2024 · Placing rejoinder to the above, the ld. AR again drew our attention to the copy of the order of ITAT Delhi ‘F’ Bench in the case of Ram Kishan (supra) and submitted that in this order, the Tribunal has considered lead judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (supra) as well as the judgement of the Hon ...
WebSep 30, 2024 · It is observed that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v/s Ghanshyam (HUF) 315 ITR 1 has held that interest paid on the excess amount, u/s 28 … great clips medford oregon online check inWebMay 14, 2024 · 12. In Bikram Singh vs. Land Acquisition Collector (1996) 89 taxmann 119 (SC) three judges bench decisions dated September 12, 1996 considered the provisions of Section 2 (28A) of the income tax act and defined the meaning of the interest.The issue before the court was whether interest received on amount of compensation Under the … great clips marshalls creekWebMar 18, 2024 · The Ld. AR submitted that Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Ghansyam HUF (supra) held that interest awarded u/s 28 of the Land Acquisition Act is … great clips medford online check ingreat clips medford njWebAug 11, 2015 · [ITO vs. Amarlal (2007) 14 SOT 239 (Del-Trib)] Interest received on delayed payment of compensation is determined and taxable under the head income from other sources on year to year basis. [CIT v Ghanshyam (HUF) (2009) 315 ITR 1 (SC)]. great clips medina ohWebJun 19, 2024 · During the arguments before us, the ld. AR argued that the issue before us stands covered by the orders of the higher Courts, Coordinate Benches mentioned … great clips md locationsWebApr 12, 2024 · The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam Das (HUF) 315 ITR 1, … great clips marion nc check in