Month: September 2006

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 amount received by the assessee-colonizer by way of advances or earnest money as a result of agreements to sell plots, did not constitute revenue receipts in its hands, as no sale deed had yet been executed ?

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Dhir & Co. Colonisers (P) Ltd. Section 28(i) Asst. Years 1980-81, 1982-83 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Rajesh Bindal, JJ. IT Ref. Nos. 102 to 104 of 1990 29th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared S.K. Garg Narwana, for the Revenue : Akshay Bhan, for the Assessee JUDGMENT By the court …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The Tribunal was right in law in allowing depreciation and investment allowance after allowing capitalisation of the amount of interest included in the bill for the purchase of plant and machinery when interest cannot be capitalised in view of Expln. 8 to s. 43(1)

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Punjab Tractors Ltd. Sections 32, 32A, 37(1), 37(4), 37(5), 43(1) Asst. Year 1986-87 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Rajesh Bindal, JJ. IT Ref. No. 580 of 1995 29th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared Dr. N.L. Sharda, for the Revenue : P.C. Jain, for the Assessee JUDGMENT By the court : …

Delhi H.C : Whether the actual service of a notice under s. 143(2) of the IT Act, 1961 as it stood before amendment, after the date prescribed in the said provision would relate back to the date of issue of the notice ?

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Bhan Textiles (P) Ltd. Section 143(2) Vikramajit Sen & Dr. S. Muralidhar, JJ. IT Appeal No. 1088 of 2005 28th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, for the Appellant : K.R. Manjani, for the Respondent ORDER By the court : This appeal was admitted on the following substantial …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The rental income from letting out open plinths to Food Corporation of India is assessable under the head ‘Income from other sources’ and not under the head ‘Income from house property’ ?

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Gowardhan Das & Sons vs. CIT Sections 22, 56 Asst. Year 1983-84 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Rajesh Bindal, JJ. IT Ref. No. 99 of 1988 28th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared S.K. Mukhi, for the Assessee : Dr. N.L. Sharda, for the Revenue JUDGMENT By the court : Following question of …

Karnataka H.C : the said plant and machinery was an integral part of the plant and machinery for the production of liquor which item would fall under Eleventh Schedule of the IT Act, 1961

High Court Of Karnataka Mcdowell & CO. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Sections 32A(2)(b)(iii), 32A(2C), Sch. XI, Item 1 Asst. Year 1989-90 R. Gururajan & N. Ananda, JJ. IT Appeal No. 107 of 1999 27th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared Arvind P. Datar with V.S. Jayakumar for S. Parthasarathi, for the Assessee : R.B. Krishna, for …

Madras H.C : the admission fee and contribution to infrastructure development fund paid by the assessee to become a member of the stock exchange is a revenue expenditure

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. S. Venkatasubramaniam Section 37(1) Asst. Years 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96, 1996-97 R. Balasubramanian & P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, JJ. Tax Case (Appeal) Nos. 67 & 68 of 2003 27th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared T. Ravikumar, for the Revenue : V. Ramachandran for Anitha Sumanth & N. Srinivasan, for the Assessees JUDGMENT P.P.S. …

Allahabad H.C : the unpaid liability towards payment to employees’ provident fund, family pension, employees’ State insurance and employees’ deposit linked insurance was not covered by the provisions of s. 43B

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. Paramount Trading Corporation Sections 43B, 187, 188 Asst. Years 1986-87, 1987-88 R.K. Agrawal & Vikram Nath, JJ. IT Ref. No. 63 of 1993 27th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared : Shambhu Chopra, for the Revenue JUDGMENT By the court : The Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following questions of law …

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the relevant provisions of gross total income as given in s. 80B of the Act while deciding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under ss. 80HH and 80-I before adjustment of losses, sustained during the course of carrying out its business of an industrial undertaking ?

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench CIT vs. Kedia Leather And Liquor Ltd. Section 80B(5), 80HH, 80-I, 254(2) Asst. Year 1991-92 S.K. Kulshrestha & S.K. Seth, JJ. IT Appeal No. 33 of 2002 26th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared : R.L. Jain with Ku. V. Mandlik, for the Appellant JUDGMENT S.K. Kulshrestha, J. : By …

Allahabad H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction for liability for market fee on the sale of sugar and molasses ?

High Court Of Allahabad Motilal Padampat Udyog Ltd. vs. CIT Section 37(1) Asst. Year 1976-77 & 1977-78 R.K. Agrawal & Vikram Nath, JJ. IT Ref. No. 81 of 1990 26th September, 2006 Counsel Appeared : R.S. Agarwal, for the Assessee : R.K. Upadhyaya, for the Revenue JUDGMENT By the court : The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred …
Malcare WordPress Security