Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Sec. 2(1)

Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(5A), Sec. 2(7), Section 2

Calcutta H.C : syndication fees and brokerages, are chargeable as interest under Interest Act

Avijit Das / May 19, 2011

High Court Of Calcutta Peerless Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Cit, Kolkata-I Assessment Years 1997-98 And 1998-99 Section : 2(1),2(5A), 2(7) […]

Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(1B), Section 2

AAR : Whether the amalgamation, as defined under s. 2(1B) of the IT Act, 1961, of STEL, SAML and SAR with Star India (P) Ltd., an Indian company, will result in any liability under the IT Act in the hands of the applicants and their shareholders ?

Avijit Das / January 21, 2010

Authority For Advance Rulings Star Television Entertainment Ltd. & Ors., In Re Section 2(1B), 47(vi), 47((vii), 245N(a), 245R(2), proviso P.V.

Sec. 2(1), Section 2

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The appellant had 20 acres of land and he cultivated Safeda trees on the land which were sold by him and the agriculture income of Rs. 5 lakhs was shown. Whether the order passed by the Tribunal is sustainable in view of the fact that the same is based on surmises and conjectures

Avijit Das / July 22, 2009

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana M.P. Singh vs. ITO Section 2(1A) Asst. Year 2000-01 Adarsh Kumar Goel & Mrs.

Sec. 2(1), Sec. 2(1A), Section 2, Section 80HHC

S.C : 40 apportionment under r.8(1) or from 40 per cent profits on sales taxable as business income.Rule 8(1) of the said rule provides that 40 per cent of the composite income from sale of tea, grown and manufactured, arrived at on making of the apportionment “shall be deemed to be income liable to tax”. Assessees exported tea in the accounting year. They were entitled to deduction under s. 80HHC

Avijit Das / December 12, 2007

Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Willamson Financial Services & Ors. Section 2(1A), 10(1), 80HHC, IT Rule 8, Art. 245,

Sec. 2(1), Section 2

Uttarakhand H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the view of the CIT(A) who held that the sale proceeds of the plants raised in the nursery on the land constituted the income from agriculture ?

Avijit Das / February 28, 2007

High Court Of Uttarakhand CIT vs. Green Gold Tree Farmers (P) Ltd. Section 2(1A) Asst. Year 1989-90 P.C. Verma &

Karnataka H.C : the assessee had a right by way of profit- a-pendere having interest in the land in the light of the decision of Supreme Court in Smt. Shanbha Bai vs. State of Bombay AIR 1958 SC 532 and the fact that the applicant itself did not have to carry basic agricultural operations personally and also that the extraction of latex is an agricultural operation and the income derived was not agricultural income

Avijit Das / September 15, 2006

High Court Of Karnataka Bharat Timber Trading Co. vs. CIT Section 2(1)(a) Asst. Year 1982-83 R. Gururajan & N. Ananda,

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top