Sec. 35(1)(iv)

Sec. 35(1)(iv), Sec. 37(1), Section 43B

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,61,462 by holding that unpaid amount of bottling fee has, on furnishing of bank guarantee, to be treated as actual payment and accordingly, the deduction in respect of the same cannot be denied under Section 43B of the IT Act, 1961 ?

/

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Udaipur Distillery Co. Ltd. Sections 35(1)(iv), 37(1), 43B Asst. Year 1988-89 Rajesh Balia &

Sec. 35(1)(iv), Section 35

Madras H.C : whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the applicant would not be eligible for deduction under s. 35(1)(iv) of the IT Act in relation to the two sums of Rs. 5,87,044 and Rs. 5,16,853 in view of the same having been claimed under s. 35(2B) and in spite of the same having been disallowed under the said section.

/

High Court Of Madras Tube Investments Of India Ltd. vs. CIT Section 35(1)(iv), 35(2B) Asst. Year 1984-85 R. Jayasimha Babu

Sec. 35(1)(iv), Section 35

Rajasthan H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on interpretation of s. 35 of the IT Act, 1961, the learned Tribunal was right in law in not allowing deduction of an amount of Rs. 11,53,294 representing the written down value of assets transferred by the assessee-company from the business use to that of scientific research used in the previous year relevant for the asst. yr. 1980-81 as expenditure on scientific research ?

/

High Court Of Rajasthan : Jaipur Bench Multi Metals Ltd. vs. CIT Section 35(1)(iv) Asst. Year 1980-81 Y.R. Meena &

Sec. 35(1)(iv)

Rajasthan H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on interpretation of s. 35 of the IT Act, 1961, the learned Tribunal was right in law in not allowing deduction of an amount of Rs. 11,53,294 representing the written down value of assets transferred by the assessee-company from the business use to that of scientific research used in the previous year relevant for the asst. yr. 1980-81 as expenditure on scientific research ?

/

High Court Of Rajasthan : Jaipur Bench Multi Metals Ltd. vs. CIT Section 35(1)(iv) Asst. Year 1980-81 Y.R. Meena &

Sec. 35(1)(iv), Sec. 37(1), Sec. 40(c), Section 33, Section 35, Section 37, Section 40, Section 80J

Calcutta H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of s. 80J of the IT Act, 1961, and r. 19A of the IT Rules, 1962, the Tribunal was right in holding that the exclusion of borrowed capital from the computation of capital employed in two new industrial undertakings for the purpose of section 80J was not at all justified ?

/

High Court Of Calcutta CIT vs. Indian Explosives Ltd. Sections 35, 80J, 35(1)(iv), 37(1), 32, 33, 40(a)(v), 40(c) Asst. Year

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security