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

A.D.JAIN, JOGINDER PALL
Max Telecom Ventures Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ajay Bahl, Satish Bansal,Kuldip Singh

ORDER

Per Joginder Pall, Accountant Member. - This appeal of the assessee has been filed against the order of the CIT(A), Ludhiana, for the assessment year 1998-99.

2. The first ground of appeal is general in nature for which no specific arguments were advanced. Therefore, the same is disposed of in these terms.

3. At the time of hearing of the appeal, the Ld. counsel for the assessee, Sh. Ajay Behl submitted that ground No. 2(A) relating to the findings of the CIT(A) that Board’s Circular No. 704 was applicable on the sale of shares of private limited companies as well as unlisted securities was nor pressed. Therefore, the same is dismissed as not pressed.

4. The only ground being pressed before this Bench is as under :

"2. Without prejudice to Ground No. 1 above:

(A)Not pressed

(B)The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that Share Purchase Agreement dated 17-3-1998 is a contract of sale and not agreement to sell;

(C)The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that the appellant itself made a declaration that the date of transfer is 17-3-1998.

(D)The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that the verificat

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