Cit vs ghanshyam huf
WebJul 16, 2009 · Commissioner Of Income Tax, Faridabad v. Ghanshyam (Huf) . S.H Kapadia, J.— Delay condoned. Leave granted. The controversy in the present batch of … WebManjeet Singh HUF Vs CIT of CWP No 15506 of 2013 dated 14.01.2014, Naresh Kumar Jain and others Vs State of Haryana ... been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court …
Cit vs ghanshyam huf
Did you know?
WebMay 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 … WebThe said issue has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ghanshyam HUF 315 ITR 1 held that the interest paid on the excess amount u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, depends upon a claim by the person whose land is acquired, where as interest u/s 34 of Land Acquisition Act is for delay in making payment. Interest ...
WebAug 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)]. WebMay 19, 2024 · AfterGhanshyam (HUF> [2009] 315 ITR 1 (SC), it was settled thatinterest received on compensation or enhanced compensation under section 28 of Land …
WebIn these circumstances the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) (Supra) and CIT Rajkot Vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya are not applicable … WebOct 31, 2024 · Ghanshyam Dass (HUF) reported in 315 ITR 1 further affirmed in CIT vs. Govindbhai Mamaiya reported in 367 ITR 498 (SC) wherein it has been held that the …
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 …
WebKamla Devi, Hisar vs Ito,Ward-5, Hisar on 21 September, 2024 Change context size Current ITA No.1418/Del/2024 (i) Decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. … fixation dysonWebJul 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 … can leaving your computer on hurtWebSep 27, 2024 · CIT vs. Chet Ram (HUF) S. 45 (5): Enhanced compensation and interest thereon under an interim order passed by the High Court in pending appeals relating to land acquisition matter are liable to be assessed for income tax … can leaving phone on charger ruin batteryWebJul 12, 2024 · “curious case of ghanshyam huf: Another question, which arises for anybody’s concern is Hon’ble Aprex Court in the case of CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF), … fixation embaseWebJul 9, 2024 · Chet Ram (HUF) dated 12.9.2024 in Civil Appeal No.13053/2024 wherein also the Hon’ble Supreme Court has again reiterated the proposition laid down in the case of … fixation elanWebIn 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 Ghanshyam (HUF), the Supreme Court held that the interest received under section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the enhanced income was to be taxed in the year ... fixation emeryWebMay 17, 2024 · In our considered view, the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) are based on the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ganshyam HUF (supra) and the … fixation elcom