Month: October 2008

Delhi H.C : the landing/parking charges paid by the assessee to the Airports Authority of India were payments for a contract of work under s. 194C of the IT Act, 1961 and not in the nature of rent as per s. 194-I

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Japan Airlines Co. Ltd. Section 194-I Badar Durrez Ahmed & Rajiv Shakdher, JJ. IT Appeal 652 of 2006 23rd October, 2008 Counsel appeared : R.D. Jolly, for the Appellant : Y.K. Kapoor with Ms. Rajni Mahajan, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Badar Durrez Ahmed, J. : Admit. 2. The following substantial …

Delhi H.C : the assessee is a company incorporated in the Netherlands and its main activity is operation of aircrafts in international traffic both for transport of passengers as well as of cargo handling

High Court Of Delhi Director Of Income Tax vs. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Section 57(iii), 90, 260A,DTAA between India & Netherlands, art. 6, DTAA between India & Netherlands, art. 8, Asst. Year 1996-97, 1997-98 Badar Durrez Ahmed & Rajiv Shakdher, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 1241 & 1245 of 2008 22nd October, 2008 Counsel appeared : Sanjeev …

Karnataka H.C : No interest need be paid by the assessee for non-deduction of TDS (being consequential) after having held that the assessee was liable to deduct TDS on the interest component paid by having remanded to verify certain facts and recompute the interest

High Court Of Karnataka CCIT & ANR. vs. United Insurance Co. Ltd. Section 194A(3)(ix), 201(1A) K. Sreedhar Rao & C.R. Kumaraswamy, JJ. IT Appeal No. 342 of 2008 21st October, 2008 Counsel appeared : M.V. Seshachala, for the Appellant JUDGMENT K. Sreedhar Rao, J. : The respondent (insurance company), pursuant to the award made under the …

Madras H.C : the amount set aside as a contribution to the assessee’s own insurance fund to meet future contingent liability of accidents is allowable as a revenue expenditure

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Kattabomman Transport Corporation Ltd. Section 37(1) Mrs. Prabha Sridevan & K. K. Sasidharan, JJ. Tax Case Appeal No. 206 of 2004 20th October, 2008 Counsel appeared : Ms. Pushya Sitaraman, for the Appellant : J. Balachandran for S. Sridhar, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Mrs. Prabha Sridevan, J. : The question …

Whether the income of Rs. 11,80,53,083 and Rs. 25,13,561 derived by the appellant from procurement of wheat and paddy as agent of Food Corporation of India/Government is exempt under s. 10(29) of the Act along with rental income from warehouses, the business of the appellant being one integrated

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Haryana Warehousing Corporation vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section 10(29), 22, 28(i) Asst. Year 2002-03 Adarsh Kumar Goel & L.N. Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal No. 16 of 2008 17th October, 2008 Counsel Appeared : Rajesh Garg, for the Appellant : Yogesh Putney, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, …

Bombay H.C : Whether the true scope and correct interpretation of Sec.37(1), 80 HHB & Section 9(1)(i) r/w. Sec.4 & 5 of the Income Tax Act,1961 and other provisions and whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in allowing the appeal of the assessee and allowing the deduction of expenditure of Rs.14,31,730/- being the expenditure incurred for exploration and production of oil and gases

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Essar Oil Ltd. Section 37(1), 80HHB, 9(1)(i), 80-O, 4, 5 D. K. DESHMUKH & J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. ITA No. 135 of 2008 16th Oct., 2008 Counsel appeared Suresh Kumar, for the Appellant.:Soli Dastoor, Sr.Advocate with N.Shah & A.K.Jasani, for the Respondent JUDGMENT 1.The Commissioner of Income Tax has raised …
Malcare WordPress Security