Month: January 2005

Bombay H.C : The issue raised in these two tax appeals, one filed by the Revenue and the other filed by the assessee being common, both these appeals are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Roshanbabu Mohammed Hussein Merchant Section 48(i) Asst. Year 1990-91 S. Radhakrishnan & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. IT Appeal No. 755 of 2000 31st January, 2005 Counsel Appeared V.H. Patil with Ms. Aasifa Khan i/b Sunil M. Lala, J. Jain & Ms. Falguni Thakkar i/b Rustomji Ginwala, for the Assessee : R.V. …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,42,577 on account of unexplained investment in the cost of construction of factory building ?

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Ganesh Rice Mills Section 69 Asst. Year 1983-84 N.K. Sud & Satish Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Ref. No. 552 of 1995 31st January, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Dr. N.L. Sharda, for the Appellant JUDGMENT N.K. Sud, J. : At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, …

Allahabad H.C : The assessee was a recognized export house and a small scale exporter who was manufacturing and producing articles and hence was entitled to weighted deduction under s. 35B

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Faizan & Co. Section 35B, 35B(1A), Expln. (a) Asst. Year 1978-79 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna, JJ. IT Ref. No. 52 of 1986 31st January, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Govind Krishan, for the Revenue : None for the Assessee JUDGMENT Prakash Krishna J. : The Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the …

S.C : The primary question involved in this appeal is whether the amount received by the respondentassessee on surrender of tenancy rights is liable to capital gains tax under s. 45

Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. D.P. Sandu Bros. Chembur (P)Ltd. Section 10(3), 14, 45, 48, 56 Asst. Year 1987-88 Mrs. Ruma Pal, Arijit Pasayat & C.K. Thakker, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 2335 of 2003 31st January, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Mohan Parasaran with Preetesh Kapur & B.V. Balaram Das, for the Appellants : Joseph Vellappally …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the AO also initiated penalty proceedings under s. 18 (1)(c) of the Act requiring the assessee to show cause as to why penalty for concealment of wealth and for furnishing inaccurate particulars be not imposed

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Prince Raninder Singh Trust Section WT 18(1)(c), WT 27A Asst. Year 1984-85 N.K. Sud & Satish Kumar Mittal, JJ. WT Appeal No. 2 of 2002 31st January, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Dr. N.L. Sharda, for the Appellant : Arun Walia, for the Respondent JUDGMENT N.K. …

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the disallowance of gratuity paid to the retiring employees ?

High Court Of Madras Sree Akilandeswari Mills (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT Section 37(1) Asst. Years 1988-89, 1989-90 N.V. Balasubramanian & Mrs. R. Banumathi, JJ. Tax Case (Appeal) Nos. 57 & 58 of 2002 28th January, 2005 Counsel Appeared P.P.S. Janardhana Raja for Subbaraya Iyer, for the Assessee : K. Subramaniam, for the Revenue JUDGMENT N.V. balasubramanian, …

Allahabad H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the order under s. 263 of the IT Act when the order of the ITO was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue on account of his failure to initiate penalty proceedings under s. 271B which attracted in assessee’s case due to contravention of the provisions of s. 44AB ?

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Ashok Construction Co. Section 263, 271B Asst. Year 1986-87 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna, JJ. IT Ref. No. 151 of 1991 28th January, 2005 Counsel Appeared : A.N. Mahajan, for the Revenue : None, for the Assessee ORDER By the court : The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following question …

Karnataka H.C : The Tribunal is the legality of levy of penalty on the petitioner for not having deducted the tax at source in respect of the interest payments made by the petitioner-company to the claimants who had put forth claims against the owners of the motor vehicles which had been insured with the petitioner insurance company

High Court Of Karnataka Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Anr. Sections 194A, 226(3) D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J. Writ Petn. Nos. 3850 to 3853 of 2005 28th January, 2005 Counsel Appeared M.V. Javali, for the Petitioner ORDER D.V. Shylendra Kumar, J. : These writ petitions by the insurance company is …

S.C : These appeals have their matrix in a common judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court. By the impugned judgment, several appeals filed by assessees and Revenue purported to be under s. 260A

Supreme Court Of India M. Janardhana Rao vs. JCIT Section 260A Asst. Year 1995-96 Mrs. Ruma Pal, Arijit Pasayat & C.K. Thakker, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 4232 to 4242 & 5322 of 2003 and 755 to 766 of 2005 28th January, 2005 Counsel Appeared R.F. Nariman, S. Ganesh, Harish N. Salve, Joseph Vellapally & M.L. Verma …
Malcare WordPress Security