243 ITR

Sec. 2(24), Sec. 2(24)(iii)

S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that CCA cannot come within the charging sections and/or within the meaning of income of a Government servant in accordance with s. 2(24) of the IT Act, 1961, read with the Fundamental Rules and cannot come within the ambit of meaning of total income as contained in s. 2(45) of the Act?

/

Supreme Court Of India Karamchari Union, Agra vs. Union Of India & Ors. Sections 2(24)(iiia), 2(24)(iiib), 17(1), 17(3) D.P. Wadhwa

Sec. 256(2), Section 192, Section 256

Delhi H.C : The assessee was under a bona fide belief that no tax is deductible at source from the conveyance allowance reimbursed to the employees when the same were not exempt under s. 10(14) of the IT Act and were also not disclosed by the assessee in Form No. 16 which contains a specific column for allowance exempt under s. 10(14)

/

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Nestle India Ltd. Sections 192, 256(2) Asst. Year 1987-88, 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93,

37(3A), Sec. 37(3b), Section 37, Section 80-O, Section 80A, Section 80AB

Calcutta H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of the ss. 37(3A), 37(3B) of the IT Act, 1961, r/w Expln. (c) thereof, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that since it is not the case of the CIT that the expenditure incurred on the motor cars on running and maintenance is on hire charges for engaging cars plied for hire the view taken by the AO was not incorrect ?

/

High Court Of Calcutta CIT vs. M.N. Dastur & Co. (P) Ltd. Sections 37(3A), 37(3B), 80AB, 80-O Asst. Year 1984-85,

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security