K. R. SHRIRAM, NEELA GOKHALE
Ramona Pinto – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K.R. SHRIRAM, J.
1. In this appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) appellant is impugning an order dated 2nd April 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). By the impugned order, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the reassessment proceedings and also upheld the assessment of a sum of Rs. 28 Crores receivable by appellant pursuant to an arbitration award as in the nature of income. The appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2010-2011.
2. In the previous year relevant to Assessment Year 2010-2011, i.e. on 17th September 2009, consent terms were reached between appellant, her brother and other members of the family, pursuant to which, the disputes between them have been settled. Consequent thereto, an arbitration award dated 25th September 2009 came to be passed in terms of the consent terms. Pursuant thereto, appellant became entitled to receive an amount of Rs. 28 Crores in full and final settlement of all disputes and claims raised by her against her brother and the other family members and/or P.N. Writer & Co. and/or any claims in respect of the bequest made under the Will dated 16th September 1990 of her late father Mr.
CIT vs. Saurashtra Cement Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 422 (SC)
CIT vs. Mafatlal Gangabhai and Co. (P) Ltd. (1996) 219 ITR 644 (SC)
Erach F.D. Mehta vs. Minoo F.D. Mehta
Maturi Pullaiah vs. Maturi Narasrmham
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. vs. CIT
Maturi Pullaiah and Another vs. Maturi Narasinhamand and Others
Parimisetti Seetharamamma vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
P.H. Divecha vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.