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

RAJENDRA, D.MANMOHAN
Income-tax Officer-25(3)(4) – Appellant
Versus
Fine Developers – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Subachan Ram,Jignesh P. Shah

ORDER

Rajendra, Accountant Member - Challenging the order dtd. 28-03-2011 of the CIT(A)-35, Mumbai, Assessing Officer (AO) has raised following Grounds of Appeal :

(i) "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the ld CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to delete the entire addition of capital gain u/s. 45(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that HDIL was admitted as partner in the partnership firm with 50% share of profit, by this arrangements 50% of the interest of the existing partners have been transferred in favour of incoming partner w.e.f. 06-07-2007 resulting in transfer of assets within the meaning of section 45(5) r.w.s. 2(47) of the Income Tax Act 1961."

(ii) The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing officer be restored."

(iii) The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground."

Assessee firm, engaged in the business of builders and developers, filed its return of income on 22.07.2008 admitting total income at Rs. Nil. Initially the return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (Act). Later on the case was selected for sc

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