Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

September 2001

Sec. 37(1), Section 37

Andhra Pradesh H.C : The assessee is not entitled to deduction of Rs. 3,30,400 being the value of gold biscuits and other small jewellery confiscated as business loss in computing his total income

Avijit Das / September 13, 2001

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh Bijjala Shivalingam vs. CIT Section 37(1) Asst. Year 1983-84 S.R. Nayak & S. Ananda Reddy, […]

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is legally justified in finding that the case of the assessee is covered under the amnesty scheme and that no penalty is leviable in assessee’s case under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act ?

Avijit Das / September 12, 2001

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Rajkumar Sancheti Section 256(2) N.N. Mathur & O.P. Bishnoi, JJ. IT Ref. No. 132

Income Tax Case Laws

Delhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the reserve on account of retrocessions ceded by the company could form a part of capital and/or reserve of the assesseecompany under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964?

Avijit Das / September 11, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Bharat General Reinsurance Ltd. vs. CIT Sections Sur Sch. II Sur Rule 1 Asst. Year 1971-72

Income Tax Case Laws

Madras H.C : Whether the credit was made to such a reserve or to a general reserve, and that the matter may therefore be remanded to the Tribunal to record a finding thereon as such a finding is essential before a decision could be rendered

Avijit Das / September 11, 2001

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Addison & Co. Ltd. Sections SURTAX Sch. II, SURTAX Rule 1(iii) R. Jayasimha Babu

Income Tax Case Laws

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the excess of the amount allowed as and when by way of depreciation allowance in the IT assessment over the amount of depreciation charged in the books of accounts of the assessee should not be reduced from the capital base of the company under r. 1(iii) of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?

Avijit Das / September 11, 2001

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Amalgamations Repco Ltd. Sections SURTAX SCH. II, r. 1(iii) R. Jayasimha Babu & Mrs.

Sec. 37(1), Sec. 40(c), Sec. 40A(5), Section 37, Section 40, Section 80AB, Section 80HHC

Gujarat H.C : Whether, the reimbursement of medical expenses and house rent allowance to the managing directors are to be considered for the purpose of computing the disallowance under s. 40(c) of the Act.

Avijit Das / September 11, 2001

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Arvind Mills Ltd. Sections 37(1), 40(c), 40A(5), 80AB, 80HHC, Rule 6D Asst. Year 1984-85

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing the deduction of Rs. 5,38,962 for the asst. yrs. 1977-78, Rs. 26,238 for the asst. yr. 1973-74 and Rs. 1,05,241 for the asst. yrs. 1976-77 representing the amount utilised for the creation of the molasses storage fund ?

Avijit Das / September 11, 2001

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh CIT vs. Nizam Sugar Factory Ltd. Section 4 Asst. Year 1973-74, 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79, 1980-81,

Sec. 260A, Sec. 80P(2)(a)(i), Section 260, Section 80P

Bombay H.C : Whether the interest accrued on the investment made in Indira Vikas Patra (‘IVP’) is an income arising out of banking business eligible for exemption under s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the IT Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

Avijit Das / September 10, 2001

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Ratnagiri District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. Sections 80P(2)(a)(i), 260A S.H. Kapadia & V.C. Daga,

Sec. 35B, Sec. 37(1), Section 37

Madras H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that gratuity provision is not an allowable deduction ?

Avijit Das / September 10, 2001

High Court Of Madras Madura Coats Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 35B, 37(1) Asst. Year 1978-79 R. Jayasimha Babu & Mrs.

Section 148, Section 163

Calcutta H.C : The facts of this case are similar and identical to that of the judgment delivered by me in WP No. 4840(W) of 2001, Ispat Industries Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT & Ors. [reported at (2002) 172 CTR (Cal) 128— Ed.]. In my opinion this High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain this application and accordingly, this application is also dismissed.

Avijit Das / September 10, 2001

High Court Of Calcutta C.E.S.C. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. Sections 148, 163, Art.

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 7 Next →

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top