Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Section 261

Calcutta H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in holding that the excess payments of Rs. 6,34,484 and Rs. 42,284 made on account of fluctuations in the exchange rates of dollars, at the time of repayment of the dollar loan, raised from EXIM Bank and ICICI, respectively, for purchasing machinery from abroad was a capital expenditure and not an allowable revenue expenditure

Avijit Das / May 18, 1987

High Court Of Calcutta Union Carbide India Ltd. vs. CIT Section 261 Dipak Kumar Sen & Shyamal Kumar Sen, JJ. […]

Sec. 40(b), Section 261

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether the Tribunal was correct in allowing the assessee’s claim for interest paid on the credit balance in the individual account of Shri Prakashchand ?

Avijit Das / April 25, 1987

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh CIT vs. Narbharam Popat Bhai & Sons Sections 40(b), 261 N.D. Ojha, C.J.; C.P. Sen

Sec. 37(1), Section 261, Section 37

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the amounts of Rs. 22,805, Rs. 20,712 and Rs. 20,713 are allowable as revenue expenditure for the asst. yrs. 1972-73, 1973-74 and 1974-75, respectively ?

Avijit Das / February 5, 1987

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh CIT vs. Southern India Mining & Slab Co. Sections 37(1), 261 Asst. Year 1972-73, 1973-74,

Calcutta H.C : From a judgment and order of this Court dt. 6th May, 1985, in IT Ref. No. 21 of 1977, the Revenue seeks to prefer an appeal to the Supreme Court. The present application is an application for condonation of delay in filing the said application.

Avijit Das / December 1, 1986

High Court Of Calcutta CIT vs. Metal Distributors Ltd. Section 261 Dipak Kumar Sen & Mrs. Monjula Bose, JJ. IT

Calcutta H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the share of income from property at Nohar in Rajasthan, the share income from Thirani Building, Darjeeling, and the share of income from the firm of M/s Maheshwari & Co. could be included in the assessment of the assessee in the status of a HUF ?

Avijit Das / June 25, 1986

High Court Of Calcutta CIT vs. Ramgopal Thirani & Sons. Section 261 Dipak Kumar Sen & Mrs. Monjula Bose, JJ.

Sec. 35B, Sec. 37(1), Section 261, Section 35, Section 80J

Calcutta H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that weighted deduction under s. 35B could not be allowed on freight of Rs. 21,86,115 and insurance of Rs. 76,918 ?

Avijit Das / January 28, 1986

High Court Of Calcutta Organon (India) Limited vs. CIT Section 35B, 37(1), 80J, 261 Satish Chandra, C.J. & Suhas Chandra

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4

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

Scroll to Top