Month: September 2012

Delhi H.C : Standing charges received from a client on account of its failure to place minimum agreed quantity of purchase orders as agreed, were not eligible for section 80-IC deduction

High Court Of Delhi Pine Packaging (P.) Ltd. VS. CIT Assessment Year : 2007-08 Section : 80-IC Sanjiv Khanna And R.V. Easwar, JJ. IT Appeal No. 656 Of 2011 March  29, 2012 JUDGMENT Sanjiv Khanna, J. – Pine Packaging Private Limited has filed the present appeal impugning the order dated 14th January, 2011 passed by the …

Delhi H.C : Whether learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investment in rent yielding property by applying the provisions of Rule 3 of Par B of 3rd Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act?

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Dinesh Jain HUF Section 69B S. Ravindra Bhat & R. V. Easwar, JJ. ITA 1667/2010 & ITA 85/2011 & ITA 1800, 1803, 1805, 1807, 1809, 1811 to 1819/2010, 1967, 1972, 1968/2010, 1969, 1970, 1971/2010 28th September, 2012 Counsel appeared Sanjeev Sabharwal, with Puneet Gupta, Gayatri Verma, Advs. for the revenue.: …

Delhi H.C : Where Tribunal allowed assessee’s claim for deduction under section 80HHC on basis of overwhelming documentary evidence adduced by assessee to prove exports which included correspondence with governmental authorities, their approval etc., order so passed by Tribunal did not require any interference

High Court Of Delhi CIT VS. M.S. International Ltd. Assessment Year : 1993-94 Section : 80HHC Ravindra Bhat And R.V. Easwar, Jj. It Appeal Nos. 999 Of 2006, 147, 210 & 575 Of 2007 And 1394 Of 2009 September  28, 2012 JUDGMENT R.V. Easwar, J. – Since all the appeals involve a common issued and were heard …

S.C : Whether amounts transferred by the assessee to Mandi Parishad would constitute application of income for charitable purposes within the meaning of Section 11(1)(a)

Supreme Court Of India CIT-II vs. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Section : 11, 2(15) S.H. Kapadia, CJ. And Madan B. Lokur, J. Civil Appeal Nos. 7040 Of 2012 & Others September 27, 2012 JUDGMENT S.H. Kapadia, CJ. – Heard learned counsel on both sides. Delay condoned. Leave granted. This batch of civil appeals has been filed …

Delhi H.C : Activities of Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) in prescribing of standards of goods and enforcing those standards cannot be considered as trade or commercial activity

High Court Of Delhi Bureau Of Indian Standards VS. DGIT (Exemptions) Section : 2(15), 10(23C) S. Ravindra Bhat And R.V. Easwar, Jj. W.P. (C) No. 1755 Of 2012 September 27, 2012 JUDGMENT S. Ravindra Bhat, J. – This judgment will dispose of a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution, whereby the writ petitioner, Bureau of …

S.C : Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the amount has been reimbursed, the quantified amount shall be certified by the Chartered Accountant of the assessee to enable the assessee to make a claim

Supreme Court Of India Kennametal India Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr. Section 37(1), 40A(9) Asst. Year 1994-95 S.H. Kapadia, CJ & Madan B. Lokur, J Civil Appeal No 7013 of 2012 26th September, 2012 Counsel Appeared K.V Mohan, R.K. Raghavan & K.V. Balakrishnan for the Appellant. : R.P. Bhatt & Rahul Kaushik, Vikas Malhotra & Anil …

Gujarat H.C : Only tax due of company, and not interest or penalty, can be recovered from directors; if no misfeasance, gross negligence or breach of duty is alleged recovery under section 179 from director cannot be made; director is liable only if recovery cannot be made from company

High Court Of Gujarat Maganbhai Hansrajbhai Patel VS. ACIT & 1 Assessment year : 1997-98 Section : 179 Akil Kureshi And Ms. Harsha Devani, JJ. Special Civil Application Nos. 3910 & 4227 Of 2012 September 25, 2012 JUDGMENT Akil Kureshi, J. – The petitioner has challenged an order dated 27.2.2012 as at Exh.S to the petition …
Malcare WordPress Security