Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

January 2005

Sec. 254(1), Section 254

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the rejection of books of account of the appellant as well as the addition aggregating to Rs. 2,12,047 on account of alleged non-maintenance of day-to-day stock and fall in GP rate ?

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Gujarat Dagina vs. DCIT Section 254(1) Asst. Year 1997-98 D.A. Mehta & Ms. H.N. Devani, JJ. Tax […]

Allahabad H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in deleting the addition of Rs. 3,29,328 made on account of cash assistance under s. 28(iv) disregarding the provisions of s. 2(24)(va) along with s. 10(3)(ii) of the IT Act, 1961, and Board’s Circular No. 1690, dt. 11th Feb., 1986?

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Raman Iron Foundry & Steel Rolling Mills Section 28(iiib) Asst. Year 1982-83 R.K. Agrawal

Sec. 44AB, Section 271B

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in interpreting the provisions of s. 271B and thereby confirming the order of the learned CIT(A), who deleted the penalty of Rs. 54,269 imposed under s. 271B by the AO ?

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Haryana Agro Services Sections 44AB, 271B Asst. Year 1990-91 G.S. Singhvi &

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in law in ignoring the facts on the record and in confirming the decision of the CIT(A) directing to delete the addition of Rs. 3,72,198 made by the AO on account of shortage of stock detected at the time of survey under s. 133A(1) by treating the same as stock sold outside the regular books of account, especially when the assessee could not reconcile the difference in the value of stock at the time of survey or during assessment ?

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Bhagwat Parsad Bansal And Sons Section 260A Asst. Year 1997-98 G.S. Singhvi

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Assessee was correct in claiming power subsidy as capital receipt

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench CIT vs. Premier Proteins Ltd. Section 4 Asst. Year 1991-92 A.M. Sapre

Sec. 37(1), Section 37

Calcutta H.C : The expenditure was incurred on entertainment like lodging, food, and presentation of valuable gifts to distributors and guests. The articles presented were gold necklace, gold rings, gold bangles, silver articles and other articles to various distributors along with the lodging and boarding

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Calcutta Ravi Marketing (P) Ltd. vs. CIT Section 37(1) Asst. Year 1988-89 D.K. Seth & Soumitra Pal,

Income Tax Case Laws

Gauhati H.C : The aforesaid notice is barred under s. 30 of the Act and therefore the proceedings proposed on the basis of the aforesaid notice are ab initio void. Section 30

Avijit Das / January 18, 2005

High Court Of Gauhati MCLEOD Russel (India) Ltd. & Anr. vs. Agriculture Income Tax officer & Ors. Section Assam Agrl.

Income Tax Case Laws, Sec. 10(14), Section 192

Karnataka H.C : Whether the Corporation was liable to deduct any tax at source in respect of payments made to the petitioners by way of conveyance allowance and additional conveyance allowance

Avijit Das / January 17, 2005

High Court Of Karnataka K.R. Muralidhar & Ors. vs. Life Insurance Corporation Of India & Ors. Sections 10(14), 192 D.V.

Section 3, Wealth Tax Act

Allahabad H.C : Whether in law and on facts of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the CWT(A)’s decision deleting the addition of Rs. 6,87,077 made on account of value of shares transferred to the trust ?

Avijit Das / January 17, 2005

High Court Of Allahabad Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Rakesh Mohan Section WT 3 Asst. Year 1980-81 R.K. Agrawal &

Sec. 44AB, Section 271B

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in reversing the order of the learned CIT(A) who confirmed the penalty of Rs. 20,064 imposed under s. 271B of the IT Act, 1961 by the AO ?

Avijit Das / January 17, 2005

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. S.S. Banga Sections 44AB, 271B Asst. Year 1993-94 G.S. Singhvi & Viney

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 8 Next →

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

Scroll to Top