Month: July 2005

AAR : Whether, in respect of the transaction, being the reorganization described in Annex. 2 of this application, the applicant is chargeable to tax in India under the provisions of the IT Act, 1961, or the Agreement for Avoidance of Double Taxation between India and the United Kingdom

Authority For Advance Rulings Citicorp Trustee Company Ltd., In Re Section 2(47), 9(1)(i) Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J., Chairman & A.S. Narang, Member AAR Nos. 647 to 650 of 2004 29th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Porus Kaka, for the Applicant : T.N. Chopra, for the CIT concerned Ruling Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J., chairman : …

Allahabad H.C : The gifts received by the applicant were not genuine and further that they fall under s. 68 of the IT Act and were thus correctly added to the income of the assessee

High Court Of Allahabad Ram Lal Agarwal vs. CIT Section 68 Asst. Years 1987-88, 1988-89 R.K. Agrawal & Rajes Kumar, JJ IT Ref. No. 43 of 1996 29th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared Siddharth Verma, for the Assessee : A.N. Mahajan, for the Revenue JUDGMENT By the Court : At the instance of the assessee, Tribunal, Delhi, …

Delhi H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, on the ground that the total income of the assessee has been assessed at a minus figure/loss ?

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Aditya Chemicals Ltd. & Ors. Section 271(1)(c), Expln. 4 Asst. Year year 1989-90 B.C. Patel, C.J. & Badar Durrez Ahmed, J. IT Appeal Nos. 183 & 205 of 2001, 1 & 72 of 2002, 301 of 2003, 106, 107, 108, 146, 223, 252, 254, 340, 362, 376, 403, 409, 414, …

Kerala H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in valuing the property on the basis of gross maintainable rent taken at Rs. 7,000 per month in accordance with sub-cl. (i) of r. 1BB(2)(a) ?

High Court Of Kerala Smt. B. Indira Devi vs. Commissioner Of Gift Tax Section GT 6, WT RULE 1BB(2)(a), Evidence Act, 1872, s. 114, Asst. Year 1983-84 P.R. Raman & K.T. Sankaran, JJ. IT Ref. No. 136 of 1999 28th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared P. Balachandran, for the Applicant : P.K.R. Menon & George K. George, …

Kerala H.C : They are entitled to claim relief under s. 89 of the IT Act apportioning the arrears of salary compulsorily credited to GPF account to various previous years to which it relates and to avail rebate thereon in the computation of tax payable

High Court Of Kerala Kerala Electricity Officers Federation & Ors. vs. Central Board Of Direct Taxes & Ors. Sections 88, 89, Rule 21A Asst. Year 1997-98 P.R. Raman & K.T. Sankaran, JJ. OP No. 5635 of 1997 28th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared Pandalai, for the Petitioners : P.K. Ravindranatha Menon, S. Ramesh Babu, N.R.K. Nayar & …

Madras H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) disallowing extra-shift allowance and additional depreciation on the assets leased out by the assessee ?

High Court Of Madras Titanium Equipment And Anode Manufacturing Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT Section 32 Asst. Year 1986-87 Markandey Katju, C.J. & Ibrahim Kalifulla, J. Tax Case (Appeal) Nos. 33 of 2002 and 22 of 2003 27th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared : P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, for the Assessee : Mrs. Pushya Sitaraman, for the Revenue JUDGMENT …

Allahabad H.C : Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim of deduction of Rs. 13,78,569 and Rs. 3,98,412 being expenditure incurred on scientific research and development ?

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. U.P. Electronics Corporation Ltd. Section 35, 36(1)(iii) Asst. Year 1985-86 R.K. Agrawal & Rajes Kumar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 45 of 1995 27th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared : R.K. Upadhayaya, for the Revenue : R.S. Agarwal, for the Assessee ORDER By the court : The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the …

Bombay H.C : Where an order has been made under sub-s. (1) in favour of any person, whether such order relates to one or more assessment years, he shall not be entitled to any relief under this section in relation to any other assessment year at any time after the making of such order.

High Court Of Bombay Sukhdev Hargopal Puri vs. Union Of India & Ors. Section 273A Asst. Years 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84, 198485, 1985-86, 1986-87 Dr. S. Radhakrishnan & J.H. Bhatia, JJ. Writ Petn. No. 1387 of 1990 26th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared Petitioner-in-person : Dr. P. Daniel with G. Hariharan, for the …

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to exemption under s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961 ?

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Rajneesh Foundation Sections 2(15), 11 Asst. Year 1991-92 Dr. S. Radhakrishnan & J.H. Bhatia, JJ. IT Appeal No. 178 of 2002 26th July, 2005 Counsel Appeared : Dr. P. Daniel & G. Hariharan, for the Revenue : S.N. Inamdar, for the Assessee JUDGMENT J.H. Bhatia, J. : Being aggrieved by …
Malcare WordPress Security