Sec. 32(1)(ii)

Income Tax Case Laws, Sec. 143(1), Sec. 143(3), Sec. 206A, Sec. 271(1)(c ), Sec. 32(1)(ii), Section 2, Section 271, Section 32, Section 32A, Section 42

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The assessee is entitled to depreciation at the rate of 40% on Tippers, Vibrator and Vibrator Soil Compactor, the issue is whether they are in the nature of commercial vehicles

/

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana CIT vs. Rakesh Jain Section 260A, 143(1), 42(1)(ii), 271(1)(c), 143(3), 32(1)(ii), 42, 2, 32,

Sec. 32(1)(ii), Sec. 32(1)(iii), Sec. 43(6)

Delhi H.C : Whether Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter “Tribunal”) was correct in law in directing the AO to recompute the depreciation after reducing scarp value of the assets, which have been discarded and written off in the books of accounts for the year under consideration from the WDV of the block of asset ?

/

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Yamaha Motor India (P) Ltd. Section 32(1)(ii), 32(1)(iii), 43(6)(c)(b) Asst. Year 2000-01, 2001-02 A.

Sec. 260A, Sec. 32(1)(ii), Section 32

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct in holding that in the present case, no colourable device has been adopted by the assessee, even when the intention of the assessee behind drafting the agreements between the assessee and the financial institution was to reduce the tax liability artificially of both the parties and as such the ratio of the decision of the Hon’ble apex Court in the case of McDowell & Co. Ltd. vs. CTO (1985) 47 CTR (SC) 126 : (1985) 154 ITR 148 (SC) has wrongly been interpreted

/

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Punjab State Electricity Board Section 32(1)(ii), 260A Adarsh Kumar Goel & Mrs.

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security