Month: September 2010

Punjab & Haryana H.C : When the Tribunal disposes of the appeal conforming to the decision of the High Court or the Supreme Court,the Tribunal retains all the powers which are there at the time of hearing of the original appea

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana CIT vs. Satpal Pandit and Co. Assessment Year 1981-82 Section : 252 Adarsh Kumar Goel And Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. ITA No. 60 Of 1999 September  30, 2010 JUDGMENT   Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. – The instant appeal has been filed by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Ignoring the facts on records as also the provisions of ss. 132(4) and 132(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 and holding that the addition of Rs. 9,00,000 made by the AO on account of commission income and confirmed by the CIT(A) was without any basis

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Lekh Raj Dhunna Section : 132 Adarsh Kumar Goel And Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 126 & 127 Of 2003 September 29, 2010 JUDGMENT Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. – This order shall dispose of IT Appeal Nos. 126 and 127 of 2003 as common question of …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the CIT(A) was justified in deduction under s. 80-IB of the IT Act, 1961 on a sum of Rs. 2,30,85,177 received by assessee from export house as DEPB considering it to be a part of sales made by the assessee

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Jaswand Sons Section 80-IB Asst. Year 2005-06 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal No. 91 of 2010 29th September, 2010 Counsel Appeared : Denesh Goyal, for the Appellant : Pankaj Jain, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar GoeL, J. : This appeal has been …

Bombay H.C : A business decision of the assessee could not be challenged by the Assessing Officer, is a perverse finding particularly in view of the fact that no prudent businessman will keep machinery idle and pay huge lease rentals as well as maintenance/servicing charges, without any benefit

High Court Of Bombay CIT, Panaji-Goa vs. Salitho Ores Ltd. Assessment Year : 1989-90 Section : 37(1) D.G. Karnik And F.M. Reis, JJ. Tax Appeal No. 18 Of 2005 September 29, 2010 JUDGMENT D.G. Karnik, J. – This appeal, at the instance of the revenue, is directed against the order dated 27-12-2004, passed by the Income-tax …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : it does not contain any firm decision that the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Assam Tea House Assessment Year : 2004-05 Section : 263 Adarsh Kumar Goel And Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal No. 32 Of 2010 September 28, 2010 JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. – This appeal has been preferred under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred …

Delhi H.C : Whether where assessee had disclosed all facts in return of income filed with department and had offered amount in question for assessment in subsequent assessment year, it could not be a case of concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars thereof

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. M.S. Bindra & Sons (P.) Ltd Assessment Year : 2001-02 Section : 271(1)(C) Chief Justice And Manmohan, J. IT Appeal No. 1479 Of 2010 September 28, 2010 JUDGMENT Manmohan, J. – The present appeal has been filed under section 260A of Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity “Act”) challenging the order …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The true interpretation of the provision of the Act the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of penalty u/s 271B for delayed filing of the audit report in response to the proceedings u/s 148 and before the completion of the assessment

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Jasbir Singh vs. CIT, Patiala Assessment Year 1991-92 Section : 271B Adarsh Kumar Goel And Ajay Kumar Mittal, JJ. IT Appeal No. 115 Of 2003 September 28, 2010 ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. – This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, …

Kerala H.C : If assessee was aggrieved of order passed by Tribunal in any manner, remedy of assessee could only be by way of further appeals to be preferred before High Court, invoking power under section 260A

High Court Of Kerala Jose Kuruvinakunnel vs. ITO, Ward-2, Kottayam Assessment Years : 1996-97 To 2000-01 Section : 254 P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. W.P. (C) No. 17738 Of 2010 September 28, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner is challenging Exts. P9 order passed by the second respondent Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ext P10 concurring order dated the …

Gujarat H.C : The requirement of recording reasons under section 127(1) is a mandatory direction under the law and non-communication thereof is not saved by showing that the reasons exist in the file although not communicated to the assessee.

High Court Of Gujarat Madhu Khurana vs. CIT Section : 127 D.A. Mehta And Ms. H.N. Devani, JJ. Special Civil Appln. No. 7969 Of 2010 September 27, 2010 JUDGMENT Ms. H.N. Devani, J. – Rule. Learned advocate for the respondents is directed to waive service. Having regard to the controversy involved in the present petition, which …
Malcare WordPress Security