Section 32

Sec. 260A, Sec. 271(1)(c ), Section 271, Section 32

Madras H.C : Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in sustaining the levy of penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Act on the rejection of claim of depreciation which was surrendered in the course of the assessment proceedings and farther on the claim of certain expenses which claim was reversed in the same proceedings by the Appellant even though there was total violation of the principles of natural justice as well as the Doctrine of Fair Procedure

High Court Of Madras B. Loganathan vs. ITO Section 32, 260A, 271(1), 271(1)(c) Asst. Year 2000-01 Dr. Vineet Kothari & […]

Section 4, Sec. 10(3), Sec. 2(4), Section 32, Section 55

Bombay H.C : Where under master agreement between Coca Cola and Parle group, assessee-subsidiary was to be formed for bottling soft drinks for coca cola and as a result of breach of contract by Coca Cola assessee’s fundamental right for starting bottling business was taken away, compensation received by assessee from Coca Cola would be treated as capital receipt

High Court Of Bombay CIT-8, Mumbai vs. Parle Soft Drinks (Bangalore (P.) Ltd.) Assessment year 1998-99 Section : 4, 2(4),

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

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

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security