Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2015 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 312 - HC - Income TaxSlump sale of a going concern - whether slump price cannot be brought to tax under section 50 as held by AO especially when the assessee continued to own some of com pany assets ? - Held that:- Two appellate courts on consideration of the entire material on record have concurrently held that the sale is a slump sale and while coming to the said conclusion, they have relied on the orders passed by the Tribunal in connection with the sister concern of the assessee. They have also followed the judgment of in the cases of CIT v. Mugneeram Bangur and Co. (Land Department) [1965 (3) TMI 22 - SUPREME Court] and also the decision of Syndicate Bank Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [1985 (3) TMI 48 - KARNATAKA High Court]. Under these circumstances, we do not see any merit in these appeals. - Decided in favour of the assessee. The assessee has also preferred cross-objections to the appeals. This court in the case of Smt. Jyoti Kumari v. Asst. CIT [2010 (2) TMI 942 - Karnataka High Court] has held that an appeal being a creature of a statute, a cross-objection in terms of rule 22 being barred with an appeal, until and unless there is express provision on settling the legal provisions one cannot hold that the implication or a right of cross-objection should be read into either the provisions of Order 42 read with sections 100 and 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure or under the provisions of sub-section (7) of section 260A of the Income-tax Act. Therefore, it is held that the cross-objection is not maintainable under section 260A of the Income-tax Act - Decided in favour of assessee.
|