II. Today's Tenders Info.
-
GUJARAT SATE ROAD DEVLOPMENT CORPORATION
GANDHI NAGAR - GUJARAT
(PLEASE CLICK HERE)
-
NAYA RAIPUR DEVLOPMENT AUTHORITY
RAIPUR - CHHATTISGARH
(PLEASE CLICK HERE)
III. Judicial Pronouncement
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax–7, Mumbai Vs. Dinesh Megji Toprani HUF, ITA No. 3404 OF 2010, Date of Order : 04/08/2011, High Court of Mumbai
The assessee HUF had sold certain immovable properties and out of the sale proceeds received, purchased immovable properties and claimed benefit of deduction under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessing officer was of the opinion that the property was purchased in the name of the individuals namely Dr.Dinesh Megji Toprani and Mrs.Jyoti Dinesh Toprani and not in the name of the HUF and, therefore, the assesseewas not entitled to the deduction under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961. No fault can be found with the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in allowing the benefit of deduction under Section 54F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the property purchased in the name of the members of the HUF, in fact belongs to the HUF.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Central II, Mumbai Vs. K. Raheja Corporation P. Limited, ITA No. 1260 of 2009, Date of Order : 08/08/2011, High Court of Mumbai
No s. 14A disallowance of interest on borrowed funds if AO does not show nexus between borrowed funds & tax-free investment
(Please click here for judgment)
New User? 
Subscribe Now