Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Uncategorized

Gujarat H.C : Since there was no liability to basic tax, the question of levy of additional tax did not arise

Avijit Das / July 9, 2023

High Court Of GujaratCommissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Ahmedabad Kaiser-I-Hind Mills Co. Ltd.Section 4, 1968FA 2 SCH. I, PART I […]

S.C : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in deleting the addition made u/s 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on conversion of upaid interest into a funded interest loan treating the same as interest payment?

Avijit Das / February 21, 2019

Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Gujarat Cyrpomet Ltd. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Civil Appeal No(s). 5347/2010 21st

Bombay H.C : The motion No.534 of 2014 seeks condonation of 374 days delay in taking out this motion to set aside the order dated 9th February, 2017 passed by the Prothonotry and Senior Master rejecting the applicant’s appeal under Rule 986

Avijit Das / June 8, 2018

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Airlift (India) Pvt. Ltd. M.S. Sanklecha & Sandeep K. Shinde, J.J. Notice Of Motion

Delhi H.C : the additions made in the course of proceedings under Section 153A/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were not warranted having regard to the judgment of this Court in CIT Kabul Chawla 380 ITR 573

Avijit Das / August 21, 2017

High Court Of Delhi Pr.CIT vs. Dharampal Premchand Ltd. Section 153A, 143(3), 132 Asst. Year 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 S.

S.C : The Assessee was entitled to deduction on account of revenue expenditure incurred on machineries replaced for the value of Rs. 26,84,235/-

Avijit Das / March 28, 2017

Supreme Court Of India CIT, Gujarat vs. Sarangpur Cotton Mfg. Co. Ltd. Section 31 Assessment Year 1974-75 R.K. Agrawal And

Karnataka H.C : The assessee trust cannot be assessed as on AOP even though the requirements of section 164(1) were not met, inasmuch as the shares of the beneficiaries were indeterminate/unknown and hence the assessing officer was justified in invoking the provisions of section 164(1) of the Act and make the assessee liable to be assessed at the maximum marginal rate in the status of AOP. Hence, it is not relevant whether the necessary ingredients for formation of an AOP are fulfilled by the assessee or not

Avijit Das / February 1, 2017

High Court Of Karnataka CIT, Bengaluru vs. India Advantage Fund-Vii Section : 164 Assessment Years : 2008-09 And 2009-10 Jayant

Kerala H.C : The assessee is a partnership firm. It originally declared loss for both the years under reference. Search under section 132 of the Income Tax Act was carried out in the business premises as well as the residential premises of the partners and books of accounts and other documents were seized

Avijit Das / July 1, 2016

High Court Of Kerala Classy The Antique Disigned Furniture vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Kozhikade Assessment Years 2007-08 And 2008-09 Antony

Rajasthan H.C : The Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Bikaner, rejecting the application preferred by the assessee under Section 12A

Avijit Das / June 2, 2016

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT, Bikaner vs. Gopi Ram Goyal Charitable Trust Section 12A Sangeet Lodha And Kailash Chandra Sharma,

Sec. 158BB, Sec. 158BC, Section 158, Uncategorized

Patna H.C : Whether the notebook marked as KPS-5 and the Bank Passbook found as a result of the survey u/s 133A which was carried out in the office premises of Sujata Hotels Pvt. Ltd. of which the Respondent assessee was a Director, on the same day as the search u/s 132 in the residential premises of the Respondent assessee, namely 24.04.2003, could not be taken into consideration by the Assessing Officer while making the computation of the undisclosed income as held by the Tribunal, as the same did not amount to “such other materials or information as are available with the Assessing Officer” within the meaning of Section 158 BB(1)

Avijit Das / April 28, 2016

High Court Of Patna CIT, Central, Patna vs. Harsh Kochar Section 158BC, 158BB Block Assessment Period 1-4-1997 To 24-4-2003 Hemant

Karnataka H.C : The disallowance of privilege fees in the assessment order is in violation of the powers of the State to have its Statute as per Entry 8 of list-II of Seventh Schedule and being within its powers under Article 245(1) and 246(3)

Avijit Das / February 18, 2016

High Court Of Karnataka Karnataka State Beverages Corpn. Ltd. vs. CIT Section 40(A)(IIB) Assessment Years 2009-10 To 2012-13 Anand Byrareddy,

Post pagination

1 2 … 11 Next →

Copyright © 2025 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top