Month: March 2005

Madras H.C : The respondent in each of the writ petitions has reason to believe that the petitioners income chargeable to tax for the asst. yr. 2000-01 has escaped assessment within the meaning of s. 147

High Court Of Madras K.S. Suresh vs. DCIT Sections 147, 148 Asst. Year 2000-01 P.D. Dinakaran, J. Writ Petn. Nos. 10607 & 10608 of 2005 31st March, 2005 Counsel Appeared P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, for the Petitioners : Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman, for the Respondent JUDGMENT P.D. dinakaran, J. : Writ Petn. Nos. 10608, 10629 and 10630 of …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The Tribunal was not right in upholding the order of the CIT(A), whereby the investment allowance on the amount of Rs. 2,83,53,123 capitalised under the head ‘Plant and machinery’ has been allowed

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. AGRO Tech (India) Ltd. Section 32A, 260A Asst. Year 1990-91 N.K. Sud & Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal No. 218 of 2004 31st March, 2005 Counsel Appeared : D.S. Patwalia, for the Revenue ORDER N.K. Sud, J. : Revenue has filed this appeal under s. 260A of …

Kerala H.C : Whether turnover on sales to export house undertaken by the assessee as a supporting manufacturer be included in the “export turnover” for the purpose of computation of deduction under the proviso to sub-s. (3) of s. 80HHC

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Janatha Cashew Exporting Co. Section 80HHC(1), 80HHC(3) Asst. Year 1992-93 K.S. Radhakrishnan, Actg. C.J. & C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. IT Appeal No. 6 of 2002 31st March, 2005 Counsel Appeared : P.K.R. Menon & George K. George, for the Appellant : P. Balachandran & Smt. Preetha S. Nair, for the …

Kerala H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, did the assessee discharge the burden of proof that lay on it in support of the claim for Rs. 7,75,602 ?

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Premier Breweries Ltd. Section 37(1) K.S. Radhakrishnan, Actg. C.J. & C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. IT Ref. No. 58 of 1997 31st March, 2005 Counsel Appeared P.K.R. Menon & George K. George, for the Applicant : C. Kochunny Nair & M.C. Madhavan, for the Respondent JUDGMENT K.S. Radhakrishnan, ACTG. C.J. : …

Allahabad H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was liable to penalty under the provisions of s. 18(1)(c) of the WT Act, 1957, r/w Expln. 4 to s. 18(1)(c) of the WT Act, 1957, despite the Press Note dt. 27th May, 1968, issued by the Ministry of Finance and Circular No. 8-WT dt. 15th Nov., 1968, issued by the CBDT ?

High Court Of Allahabad Mohd. Farooq vs. CIT Section WT 18(1)(c) Asst. Year 1979-80, 1980-81 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna, JJ. WT Ref. No. 65 of 1992 31st March, 2005 Counsel Appeared : S.D. Singh, for the Assessee : A.N. Mahajan, for the Revenue JUDGMENT R.K. Agrawal, J. : The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following …

Allahabad H.C : Whether the Tribunal is justified in view of the provisions of r. 1A of the Second Schedule of the Surtax Act in holding that in order to arrive at the capital base provision of taxation to be taken is not the provision at the end of the year but as it stood at the first day of the commencement of the accounting period ?

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Raj Narain Pratap Narain Surtax Sch. II, R. 1A Asst. Year 1980-81 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna, JJ. IT Ref. No. 165 of 1989 30th March, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Shambhoo Chopra, for the Revenue : R.R. Agrawal, for the Assessee JUDGMENT R.K. Agrawal, J. : The Tribunal, Delhi, has …

S.C : M/s Satellite Television Asian Region Limited, Hong Kong (referred to as “STAR”, Hong Kong). The business of STAR is to telecast channels from satellites situated outside India

Supreme Court Of India Star India (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise Section 1994 FA 65(13), 1994 FA 65(13A), 2001 FA 137(a), 2002 FA 148(2) Mrs. Ruma Pal, Arijit Pasayat & C.K. Thakker, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 5072, 5276, 5399 & 5400 of 2004 30th March, 2005 Counsel Appeared V. Sridharan, K. Srikant, Rajesh Kumar …

Gujarat H.C : the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation allowance under s. 32 for the full year thereby granting depreciation twice on the same assets in one assessment year to the firm before the dissolution and to its partner after dissolution

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Fluid Controls MFG. Co. Sections 32, 34, Rule 5 Asst. Year 1983-84 D.A. Mehta & Ms. H.N. Devani, JJ. IT Ref. No. 124 of 1993 30th March, 2005 Counsel Appeared K.M. Parikh, for the Petitioner : None, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Ms. H.N. Devani, J. : The Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench …

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the matters disclosed in the returns filed for the relevant assessment years falling in the block period could not be investigated in the block assessment under s. 158BC ?

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh CIT vs. C.L. Khatri Sections 158B(b), 158BA, 158BB Asst. Year Block period 1987-88 to 1997-98 R.V. Raveendran, C.J. & Shantanu Kemkar, J. MA(IT) No. 20 of 2001 29th March, 2005 Counsel Appeared Rohit Arya with Sanjeev Tuli, for the Appellant : A.P. Shrivastava, for the Respondent ORDER R.V. Raveendran, C.J. : …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the provisions of proviso (ii) to sub-s. (1) of s. 164 are not applicable in this case ?

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Poonam Trust Section 164(1), Proviso (ii) Asst. Year 1983-84 D.K. Jain, C.J. & Hemant Gupta, J. IT Ref. No. 45 of 1989 29th March, 2005 Counsel Appeared D.S. Patwalia, for the Revenue : S.K. Mukhi, for the Assessee JUDGMENT D.K. Jain, C.J. : The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh …
Malcare WordPress Security