SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(All) 2524

MARKANDEY KATJU, U.PANDEY
Commissioner of Income-tax – Appellant
Versus
Sahara Investment India Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
PERCY PARDIWALA, S.D.SINGH, SAMBHU CHOPRA, Soli Dastur,

( 1 ) THIS is an income-tax application under Section 256 (2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking reference of the following questions to us for our opinion :

"whether in view of the findings recorded by the Tribunal that the facts as narrated by the departmental authorities have not been disputed, accepting deposits on loan under various schemes and converting them into income was a regular trading activity of the assessee liable to tax under the Income-tax Act ? whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the entire deposit received by the assessee was capital receipt when in the terms and conditions of the application form itself, there is a condition that a part of the deposit will be deducted as administrative and process charges if prematurity payment is taken by the depositor ? whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the deposits as of capital nature when in the cases of CIT v. Karam Chand Thapar [1996] 222 ITR 112 and CIT v. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. [1996] 220 ITR 305, the apex court has held that any amount deducted/retained/forfeited by the assessee was its income made in the course of its business and had to be asses

























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top