Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

March 2005

Section 147, Section 148

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

Avijit Das / March 31, 2005

High Court Of Madras K.S. Suresh vs. DCIT Sections 147, 148 Asst. Year 2000-01 P.D. Dinakaran, J. Writ Petn. Nos. […]

Sec. 260A, Section 32, Section 32A

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

Avijit Das / March 31, 2005

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. AGRO Tech (India) Ltd. Section 32A, 260A Asst. Year 1990-91 N.K. Sud

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

Avijit Das / March 31, 2005

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.

Sec. 37(1), Section 37

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 ?

Avijit Das / March 31, 2005

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Premier Breweries Ltd. Section 37(1) K.S. Radhakrishnan, Actg. C.J. & C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J.

Section 18, Wealth Tax Act

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 ?

Avijit Das / March 31, 2005

High Court Of Allahabad Mohd. Farooq vs. CIT Section WT 18(1)(c) Asst. Year 1979-80, 1980-81 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna,

Income Tax Case Laws

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 ?

Avijit Das / March 30, 2005

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Raj Narain Pratap Narain Surtax Sch. II, R. 1A Asst. Year 1980-81 R.K. Agrawal

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

Avijit Das / March 30, 2005

Supreme Court Of India Star India (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise Section 1994 FA 65(13), 1994 FA 65(13A),

Section 32, Section 34

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

Avijit Das / March 30, 2005

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Fluid Controls MFG. Co. Sections 32, 34, Rule 5 Asst. Year 1983-84 D.A. Mehta

Income Tax Case Laws, Sec. 158B, Sec. 158BA, Sec. 158BB

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 ?

Avijit Das / March 29, 2005

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh CIT vs. C.L. Khatri Sections 158B(b), 158BA, 158BB Asst. Year Block period 1987-88 to 1997-98

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 ?

Avijit Das / March 29, 2005

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Poonam Trust Section 164(1), Proviso (ii) Asst. Year 1983-84 D.K. Jain, C.J.

Post pagination

1 2 … 8 Next →

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

Scroll to Top