December 2002

Sec. 37(1), Section 37

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law and had valid material in holding that the sum of Rs. 50 lakhs paid by the assessee to Dynavision Dealers’ Welfare Trust on 26th Dec., 1984 is allowable as a business expenditure, laid out wholly and exclusively for its business under s. 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961 ?

/

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Dynavision Ltd. Sections 37(1), 40A(9) Asst. Year 1985-86 N.V. Balasubramanian & K. Raviraja Pandian, […]

Sec. 36(1)(va), Section 36, Section 43B

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that there was certain amount of ambiguity over the expression ’15 days from the close of the month’ as defined in s. 38 of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, vis-a-vis month in which salary becomes due to the employees and the salary is paid to the employee ?

/

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Madras Radiators & Pressings Ltd. Sections 36(1)(va), 43B Asst. Year 1991-92 N.V. Balasubramanian &

Section 3, Wealth Tax Act

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in overlooking sub-s. (7) of s. 40 of the Finance Act, 1983, and holding that the said section relating to levy of wealth-tax in the case of closely-held companies does not apply to the assessee-club, which has been declared on its own request as a company under s. 2(h)(iii) of the WT Act ?

/

High Court Of Madras Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Kodaikanal Club Sections FA1983 40, WT 2(h)(iii), WT 3 Asst. Year

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security