10:00 - 5:30

Our Opening Hours Mon. - Fri.




Call Us For Free Consultation


Income Tax Judgments

RATTAN ADVOCATES | > Judgments  > Income Tax Judgments

Supreme Court-Dispute of inheritance is a Civil Dispute-cannot be decided under Companies Act

The Supreme Court on 6 th July 2020 in the case of Aruna Oswalvs Pankaj Oswal has categorically held that dispute about inheritance of shares is a civil dispute and the same cannot be decided in proceedings under Section 241/ 242 of Companies Act, 2013. The brief facts of the case are that Late Abhey Kumar Oswal held  5,35,3,960 shares in M/s. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd., a listed company. He died on 29.3.2016 in Russia due to heart attack. He is survived by his wife, 2 sons and a married daughter. Before his death on 18.6.2015 Abhey Kumar Oswal filed a nomination according to section 72 of the Act in favour of Mrs.ArunaOswal, his wife which was duly attested by 2 witnesses. In the said nomination, it was explicitly provided that this nomination would supersede any prior nomination or testamentary document made by him. The name of his wife was duly registered as a holder on 16.4.2016 for the shares held by her deceased husband. Pankaj Oswal, the elder son of late Abhay Oswal filed a partition suit in the Civil Courts claiming entitlement to one­fourth of the estate of his father including the deceased’s shareholdings. The High Court vide order dated 8.2.2017...

Continue reading

S.69C: Bogus Purchases-Onus of proof

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1940 OF 2017 Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-13, Mumbai .. Appellant v/s. Vaman International Pvt. Ltd. .. Respondent Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Appellant. CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN, & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 29, 2020. ORAL ORDER (PER UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) :- . Heard Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, learned standing counsel, revenue for the appellant. 2. This appeal has been fled by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) against the order dated 16.11.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” Bench, Mumbai (“Tribunal” for short) in Income Tax Appeal No. 794/Mum/2015 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 3. Revenue has preferred the appeal projecting the following questions as substantial questions of law : “(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal was justifed in holding that provisions of section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are not applicable in case of bogus purchases or sales where the genuineness of the transaction is not explained or explanation ofered by the assessee is not satisfactory and the same is to be treated as income of the assessee ? (B) Whether on the facts and...

Continue reading