Sec. 36(1)(iii)

Section 80-IB, Sec. 36(1)(iii), Section 147

Gujarat H.C : Petitioner had filed the return of income on 31.10.2001 declaring total income of Rs. 7.23 crores (rounded off). This return was taken in scrutiny by the Assessing Officer who framed assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act on 30.3.2004 accepting the declaration of income made by the petitioner in the return

/

High Court Of Gujarat N.K. Proteins Ltd. vs. ITO (OSD) Section 80-IB, 36(1)(iii) And 147 Assessment Year 2001-02 Akil Kureshi

Sec. 40(a)(i), Sec. 194A, Sec. 36(1)(iii), Section 147

Gujarat H.C : Where during assessment, Assessing Officer had examined entire claim of interest expenditure incurred in respect of Deep Discount Bonds and concluded said claim as not valid, he could reopen assessment taking ground that expenditure was disallowable for non-deduction of tax at source

/

High Court Of Gujarat Nirma Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle-5 Section  : 40(a)(ia), 36(1)(iii), 194A and 147 Assessment Year : 2005-06

Sec. 36(1)(iii)

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Assessee was having interest free capital before any interest free advance was made and that there is nothing on record by any of the authorities below that the assessee had used the interest bearing funds for other than business purposes, whereas the assessee had submitted that loan raised by the assessee has been used for the purpose of business, ignoring the specific finding of the AO that the claims of the assessee that interest bearing funds were not diverted as interest free loan and that advances were given during the course of business, were factually incorrect

/

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana CIT vs. Smt. Satish Bala Malhotra Section : 36(1)(III) Assessment Year : 2006-07 S.J.

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

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has grossly erred in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer and order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chandigarh with regard to the disallowance of interest amounting to Rs.28,70,608/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act which is the actual expenditure incurred by the appellant but neither allowed as a deduction u/s 36(1)(iii) as business expenditure nor treated as capital expenditure

/

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana Thukral Regal Shoes vs. CIT, Chandigarh Section 36(1)(iii) Assessment year 2009-10 S.J. Vazifdar, ACTG.

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security