Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Section 40A

Sec. 260A, Sec. 40A(3), Section 260

Allahabad H.C : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the case of the assessee falls in the second proviso to s. 40A(3) and rightly deleted the disallowance of Rs. 14,58,691 ?

Avijit Das / January 22, 2001

High Court Of Allahabad CIT & Anr. vs. Suresh Kumar Agarwal Sections 40A(3), 260A Sudhir Narain & Bhagwan Din, JJ. […]

Sec. 40A(5), Section 40A

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal has erred in law in agreeing with the submissions of the assessee that the value of other perquisites should be made in accordance with the corresponding rules contained in IT Rules in conformity with the judgments in CIT vs. Nuchem Plastics Ltd. (1990) 82 CTR (P&H) 357 : (1989) 179 ITR 196 (P&H) : TC 18R.323 and Geoffrey Manners & Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1996) 136 CTR (Bom) 169 : (1996) 221 ITR 695 (Bom) : TC S18.2014 ?

Avijit Das / November 15, 2000

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Lakhani Footwear Ltd. Sections 40A(5), 260A Asst. year 1988-89 G.S. Singhvi &

Madras H.C : Two questions have been referred to us, one at the instance of the assessee, and the other at the instance of the Revenue. The assessment year is 1981-82

Avijit Das / November 13, 2000

High Court Of Madras South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT Section 40A(5), Rule 6D Asst. year 1981-82 R. Jayasimha

Gujarat H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case the claim of the assessee was governed by Expln. (b)(vii) of s. 40A(8) of the IT Act, 1961 and hence the disallowance of interest of Rs. 49,984 was not justified ?

Avijit Das / July 29, 2000

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Jagdish Processors (P) Ltd. Section 40A(8) Asst. Year 1980-81 D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J. & A.R.

Sec. 40A(3), Section 4, Section 40A

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 64,000 in view of the provisions of s. 40A(3) of the IT Act, 1961, and r. 6DD of the IT Rules, 1962 ?

Avijit Das / November 16, 1999

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Aggarwal Steel Traders vs. CIT & Anr. Sections 4, 40A(3) Asst. Year 1981-82 N.K.

Sec. 37(1), Sec. 40A(9), Section 37

Kerala H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and also going by the principles laid down in CIT vs. India Tobacco Co. Ltd. (1978) 114 ITR 182 (Cal) : TC 16R.220 and 162 ITR 66 (sic) the payment of Rs. 5,34,406 to FACT school is an allowable deduction?

Avijit Das / October 25, 1999

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Travancore Cochin Chemicals Ltd. Sections 37(1), 40A(9), 40A(10), 145 Asst. Year 1985-86 Mrs. K.K.

Section 40, Section 40A

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was not right in holding that the various accounts on which interest of Rs. 31,886 and Rs. 47,176 is paid fall outside the purview of Expln. (b) to s. 40A(8) ?

Avijit Das / May 3, 1999

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Navjivan Roller & Pulse Mills Sections 40A(8) Asst. Year 1978-79, 1979-80 Rajesh Balia &

Sec. 40(c), Sec. 40A(5), Section 40, Section 80J

Madras H.C : The provisions of s. 40(c)(ii) and not s. 40A(5) should be applied in allowing the deduction in respect of salary, perquisites, etc., made to the managing director

Avijit Das / February 19, 1999

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Premier Cotton Mills Ltd. Sections 40(c), 40A(5), 80J Asst. Years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 R.

Sec. 37(1), Sec. 40A(7), Section 37, Section 40

Madras H.C : The assessee would have received such approval if it had been sought for, the scheme being one formulated by the Life Insurance Corporation of India which has been adopted by a large number of the assessees, has led to thisreference.

Avijit Das / September 2, 1998

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Coimbatore Premier Corporation (P) Ltd. Sections 37(1), 40A(7) Asst. Year 1976-77 R. Jayasimha Babu

Sec. 40A(8), Section 58

Madras H.C : The brief facts of the case of the petitioner herein as seen from the affidavits are as hereunder. The assessment years concerned in these writ petitions are 1976-77, 1977-78, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83.

Avijit Das / July 3, 1998

High Court Of Madras Emcete And Sons Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. Sections 40A(8), 58(2), 264

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 12 13 14 … 16 Next →

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top