Month: September 2005

Allahabad H.C : The CWT(A) was bound to get the matter of valuation of property referred to the Valuation Officer before enhancing the value of the same, while disposing of the appeal under s. 23 (5) of the WT Act, particularly when the matter of valuation of property was not referred to the Valuation Officer by the AO

High Court Of Allahabad Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Someshwar Saran Kothiwal Sections WT 7, WT 16, WT 16A, 18(1)(c), WT 23(5) Asst. Years 1980-81, 1981-82, 1982-83, 1983-84 R.K. Agrawal & Rajes Kumar, JJ. WT Ref. No. 31 of 1997 30th September, 2005 JUDGMENT Rajes Kumar, J. : At the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal …

Bombay H.C : Relief under s. 80M should be granted without deducting from the gross dividend, the interest paid on overdraft and other expenditure incurred for the purpose of earning the dividend in view of the provisions of s. 80AA r/w s. 80M ?

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Emrald Co. Ltd. Sections 36(1)(iii), 57(iii), 80M Asst. Year 1981-82 V.C. Daga & A.S. Aguiar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 117 of 1989 30th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared Ashok Katangale, for the Revenue : Ms. Aarti Vissanji, for the Assessee JUDGMENT A.S. Aguiar, J. : The following question of law arising …

Allahabad H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was, in law, justified in holding that the assessee’s claim for investment allowance under s. 32A as well as additional depreciation on computer was allowable ?

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Radla Machinery Export Section 32A Asst. Year 1982-83 & 1983-84 R.K. Agrawal & Prakash Krishna, JJ. IT Ref. Nos. 17 of 1991 & 251 of 1992 30th September, 2005 JUDGMENT By the court : These two references under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, are at the instance of …

Bombay H.C : Where the assessee is a dealer in shares and holds certain shares as stock-in-trade, the interest paid by the assessee on the funds borrowed for the purpose of investment in such shares is not to be reduced from the gross dividend while granting relief under s. 80M

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Maganlal Chaganlal (P) Ltd. Section 80M Asst. Year 1975-76 V.C. Daga & A.S. Aguiar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 37 of 1990 30th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared Ashok Kotangale, for the Revenue : Ms. Asifa Khan, for the Assessee JUDGMENT V.C. Daga, J. : This reference under s. 256(1) of the …

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that only the cumulative preference dividends relating to the previous year amounting to Rs. 65,000 could be deducted in working out the undistributed income, which was liable to additional income-tax under s. 104 of the IT Act, 1961 ?

High Court Of Bombay Vissanji Sons & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT Section 104 Asst. Year 1978-79 V.C. Daga & A.S. Aguiar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 140 of 1988 30th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared Ms. Aarti Vissanji & S.J. Mehta, for the Applicant : Parag Vyas, for the Respondent JUDGMENT V.C. Daga, J. : This reference under …

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal being the custodian of the IT Act, was right in law in holding that the provisions of IT Rules, 87 and 88 and the Board’s notification issued in exercise of the powers conferred under s. 36(1)(iv) of the IT Act should be ignored as being conflict with the provisions of s. 36(1)(iv) ?

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Sections 32, 36(1)(iv), 37(1), 43(3), 216, Rule 87, Rule 88 Asst. Year 1977-78 V.C. Daga & A.S. Aguiar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 179 of 1988 30th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared Ashok Kotangale, for the Applicant : S.E. Dastur with B.V. Jhaveri, for the Respondent JUDGMENT V.C. …

Karnataka H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that penalty under s. 271(1)(c) was not exigible in the present case ?

High Court Of Karnataka CIT vs. T. Ashok Pai Section 271(1)(c) Asst. Year 1985-86 H.L. Dattu & H.N. Nagamohan Das, JJ. ITRC No. 492 of 1998 29th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared : M.V. Seshachala, for the Revenue : G. Sarangan & S. Parthasarathi, for the Assessee JUDGMENT H.N. Nagamohan Das, J. : At the instance of …

Madras H.C : The Senior Vice President or a Vice President shall exercise such of the powers and perform such of the functions of the President as may be delegated to him by the President by a general or special order in writing.

High Court Of Madras President, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal vs. A. Kalyanasundaram & Ors. Section 252(5), 255(1), ITAT Rule 3 Markandey Katju, C.J. & A. Kulasekaran, J. Writ Petn. No. 25484 of 2005, WPMP No. 27923 of 2005 & WVMP No. 1850 of 2005 29th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared : P.P. Malhotra with Sharma for R. …

AAR : Whether looking to the nature of activities to be carried on by the liaison office (as proposed to be set up in India by UAE based Gutal Trading Est.) the applicant can be held to have earned any income ?

Authority For Advance Rulings Gutal Trading Est., In Re Section 9(1)(i), DTAA between India & UAE, Art. 4(1) Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J., Chairman & A.S. Narang, Member AAR No. 634 of 2004 28th September, 2005 Counsel Appeared S.K. Garg, for the Applicant : C.S. Parthasarathi, for the CIT concerned Ruling A.S. Narang, Member : In …
Malcare WordPress Security