Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Sec. 43(3)

Sec. 43(3), Section 32

Kerala H.C : According to the assessee, prawn ponds are tools to the business of the assessee and hence the same constitute ‘plant’ eligible for depreciation at the rates applicable to plant and machinery.

Avijit Das / October 14, 2004

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Victory Aqua Farm Ltd. Sections 32, 43(3) Asst. Year 1994-95 S. Sankarasubban & Pius […]

Sec. 43(3), Section 32, Section 32AB, Section 80-I, Section 80HH

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in admitting the claim of the assessee for deductions under ss. 80HH and 80-I and 32AB of the IT Act, in respect of business of poultry-farming ?

Avijit Das / October 7, 2004

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Shivalik Poultries Sections 32, 32AB, 43(3), 80HH, 80-I Asst. Year 1988-89 G.S.

Sec. 43(3), Section 32, Section 43

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in allowing depreciation on the plinth platforms at the rate prescribed for the ‘building’ and not treating them as ‘plant’ ?

Avijit Das / April 30, 2004

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Babulal Agrawal vs. CIT Sections 32, 43(3) Dipak Misra & A.K. Shrivastava, JJ. IT Ref.

Sec. 37(3), Sec. 43(3), Section 32A

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in holding that the disallowance out of travelling expenses under the provisions of r. 6D of the IT Rules should be worked out by taking into consideration the yearwise details of such travelling expenses rather than trip-wise expenses ?

Avijit Das / February 26, 2004

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Sayaji Iron & Engg. (P) Ltd. Sections 32A(2), 37(3), 43(3), Rule 6D Asst. Year

Sec. 32(1), Sec. 43(3), Section 32, Section 32A, Section 43

Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the view taken by the CIT(A) that the assessee’s building of massive reinforced concrete structure is an integral part of the plant and machinery and consequently in directing the ITO to allow investment allowance and depreciation thereon ?

Avijit Das / September 1, 2003

High Court Of Rajasthan : Jaipur Bench CIT vs. R.G. Ispat Ltd. Sections 32(1), 32A, 43(3) Asst. Year 1982-83 S.K.

Sec. 32(1), Sec. 43(3), Section 32A

Rajasthan H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that the building in question was covered within the meaning of the term “Plant” for the purposes of allowance of depreciation and investment allowance ?

Avijit Das / January 31, 2003

High Court Of Rajasthan : Jaipur Bench CIT vs. R.G. Ispat Ltd. Sections 32(1), 32A, 43(3) Y.R. Meena & K.C.

Sec. 32(1), Sec. 43(3)

Kerala H.C : This appeal filed by the Department is against the order of the Tribunal cancelling the order issued by the CIT(A) under s. 263 of the IT Act disallowing depreciation at the rate applicable to “plant” on the nursing home of the assessee.

Avijit Das / October 4, 2002

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Dr. Ganga R. Menon Section 32(1), 43(3) G. Sivarajan & C.N. Ramachandran Nair, JJ.

Sec. 43(3), Section 32

Rajasthan H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right .in treating sanitary fittings as plant installed in the cinema hall on the analogy of the Supreme Court’s decision in CIT vs. Taj Mahal Hotel 1973 CTR (SC) 480 : (1971) 82 ITR 44 (SC)

Avijit Das / August 29, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Jodhana Real Estate Development Co. (P) Ltd. Sections 32, 43(3) Asst. Year 1986-87 N.N.

Sec. 32(1), Sec. 36(1)(vii), Sec. 43(3), Section 32, Section 32A

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) allowing investment allowance on technical know-how fees when as per the provisions of s. 35AB, technical know-how fee is allowable as revenue expenditure in 6 yearly equal instalments?

Avijit Das / August 14, 2002

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. ASEA Ltd. Sections 32(1), 32A, 36(1)(vii), 43(3) Asst. Year 1988-89 S.H. Kapadia & J.P.

Sec. 32(1)(iii), Sec. 37(1), Sec. 43(3), Sec. 43(6), Section 32

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest paid under s. 139(8) of the IT Act, 1961, is to be allowed as a deduction under s. 80V and s. 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961?

Avijit Das / December 6, 2001

High Court Of Madras The Guindy Machine Tools (P) Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 32(1)(iii), 37(1), 43(3), 43(6), 80V Asst. Year

Post pagination

← Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next →

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

Scroll to Top