Month: September 1998

Gujarat H.C : Whether the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 4,36,307 on account of bad debt observing that in view of the amended provisions of s. 36(1)(vii) the assessee is not required to establish that the debt had become bad?

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Girish Bhagwat Prasad Sections 36(1)(vii), 256(2) R.K. Abichandani & A.R. Dave, JJ. IT Appln. No. 185 of 1998 28th September, 1998 Counsel Appeared Manish R. Bhatt, for the Petitioner : S.N. Soparkar, for the Respondent JUDGMENT R.K. Abichandani, J. : The Revenue has suggested for following question in para 4 …

Madras H.C : On 17th Sept., 1987, a search was conducted in the residential premises, at three business premises situated at Tuticorin and one business premise situated at Pavoor Chatram, Tirunelveli District, of the assessee under s. 132

High Court Of Madras C. Christopher vs. CIT & Anr. Section 273A Asst. Year 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87, 1987-88, 1988-89 R. Jayasimha Babu, J. Writ Petn. No. 14625 of 1994 & WMP No. 22074 of 1994 22nd September, 1998 Counsel Appeared Arvind P. Datar, for the Petitioner : Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Respondents JUDGMENT R. Jayasimha …

Madras H.C : The petitioner has challenged the rejection of the application filed by it before the CBDT for waiver of interest on the sum of Rs. 3,62,042 being the amount by which the first instalment of advance tax paid by it on 14th Sept., 1989, fell short of 20 per cent of the tax liability for the year.

High Court Of Madras Precot Mills Ltd. vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes & Ors. Sections 119(2)(a), 234C R. Jayasimha Babu, J. Writ Petn. No. 14628 of 1994 & WMP No. 22078 of 1994 17th September, 1998 Counsel Appeared Srinath Sridevan, for the Petitioner : Mrs. Chitra Venkataraman, for the Respondents JUDGMENT R. Jayasimha Babu, J. …

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that a sum of Rs. 82,500 paid towards unexpired portion of the route permit was not a revenue expenditure ?

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd. Section 2(38), 36(1)(iv), 37(1) Asst. Year 1976-77 R. Jayasimha Babu & Mrs. A. Subbulakshmy, JJ. Tax Case No. 779 of 1984 12th September, 1998 Counsel Appeared : C.V. Rajan, for the Revenue : R. Meenakshisundaram, for the Assessee JUDGMENT R. Jayasimha Babu, J. : There are …
Malcare WordPress Security