Section 28 Archives - taxcaselaw.com

High Court Of Calcutta Pr.CIT vs. West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited Section 2(28A), 40(a)(ia), 194A Asst. Year 2005-2006

Sec. 36(1)(va), Sec. 2(24), Section 28

Kerala H.C : Whether the term ‘amounts payable’ as used in the relevant provision of law does take in employee’s contribution as well, or will it stand confined to employer’s contribution alone?

Avijit Das / July 2, 2018

High Court Of Kerala Popular Vehicles & Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT Section 36(1)(va) , 28, 2(24) Asst. Year 2008-09

Sec. 245Q, Sec. 2(24), Sec. 2(24)(iii), Sec. 28(iii)

AAR : The representative/liaison office (LO) proposed to be established by IZA in India would be liable to income-tax in India under the provisions of the Act or the provisions of Double Taxation Avoidance agreement between India and Belgium (‘India -Belgium DTAA’’)

Avijit Das / May 24, 2018

Authority Of Advance Rulings International Zinc Association In Re Section 245Q(1), 28(iii), 2(24)(iii) R.S. Shukla, In-Chargechairman & Ashutosh Chandra, Member

Section 80HHC, Section 28

S.C : Whether the export house premium received by the assessee is includible in the “profits of the business” of the assessee while computing the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

Avijit Das / April 27, 2018

Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Carpet India Section 80HHC, 28 Asst. Year 2001-2002 R. K. Agrawal & Abhay Manohar

Sec. 36(1)(iii), Section 28

Gujarat H.C : Interest on Special Purpose Notes was required to be disallowed when the said interest was in respect of the capital borrowed for the purposes of the business of the appellant

Avijit Das / October 10, 2017

High Court Of Gujarat Nirma Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section 36(1)(iii), 28 Asst. Year 1999-2000 Akil Kureshi

Sec. 28(i), Section 22

Delhi H.C : Where assessee-company was formed for purchasing and selling properties, earning of rental income by letting out properties owned by it was chargeable to tax under head ‘income from house property’ and not under head ‘Profits and gains of business’

Avijit Das / September 21, 2017

High Court Of Delhi Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs. Atma Ram Properties (P.) Ltd. Section 22, 28(i) Assessment years 1984-85 to

Sec. 143(2), Sec. 32(1)(iia), Section 28, Section 37

Bombay H.C : The Hon’ble ITAT is right in deleting the addition of Rs.1,53,313 on account of disallowance of excess claim of depreciation @60% as against 15% on UPS at par with the depreciation rate on computers when UPS are electrical equipments as held in the decision of Hon’ble Delhi Bench of ITAT in Nestle India Ltd. v DCIT (2007) 111 TTJ (Del) 0498

Avijit Das / August 16, 2017

High Court Of Bombay (Goa Bench) Pr.CIT vs. Sesa Resources Ltd. Section 143(2), 32(iia), 28, 37 G.S. Patel & Nutan