S.C : They were not included in the “total turnover” for working out the deduction under s. 80HHC
Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Lakshmi Machine Works Section 80HHC Asst. Year 1993-94 S.H. Kapadia & B. Sudershan Reddy, […]
Section 80HHC
290 ITR
Sec. 158BB, Sec. 2(22)(E)
S.C : the Department searched the premises of the assessee under s. 132
Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Mukundray K. Shah Sections 2(22)(e), 158BB Block period 1st April, 1990 to 24th Aug.,
Sec. 37(1), Section 43B
S.C : Whether the Tribunal were correct in holding that the amount of Rs. 13,25,572 levied by the Dy. Commr. of Excise (Breweries & Distilleries), Bangalore, for failing to affix adhesive labels on arrack bottles and failing to mature the arrack for the prescribed period as per Karnataka Excise (Manufacturing & Bottling of Arrack) Rules, 1997 was an allowable deduction despite the penalty levied having arisen due to infraction of law?
Supreme Court Of India CIT & Anr. vs. Distillers Co. Ltd. Sections 37(1), 43B S.B. Sinha & Markandey Katju, JJ.
Section 80HHC
S.C : Whether the export house premium received by the assessee is includible in the “profits of the business” of the assessee while computing the deduction under s. 80HHC of the IT Act, 1961 ?
Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Baby Marine Exports Section 80HHC Asst. Years 1992-93, 1993-94, 1994-95 Ashok Bhan & Dalveer
Income Tax Case Laws, Section 276B, Section 278, Section 278B
S.C : the Act provides for imposition of penalty for non-payment of tax
Supreme Court Of India Madhumilan Syntex Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union Of India & Anr. Sections CR.PC 245, CR.PC 482,
Sec. 194C
Uttaranchal H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant was liable to deduct tax under s. 194C of the Act from the deposited amount returned to the travelling agents ?
High Court Of Uttaranchal Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. ITO Section 194C Asst. Years 1996-97, 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 P.C.
Section 80J
Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing deduction under s. 80J for asst. yrs. 1979-80 and 1980-81 when the period of five years laid down in sub-s. (2) of s. 80J had already expired ?Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing deduction under s. 80J for asst. yrs. 1979-80 and 1980-81 when the period of five years laid down in sub-s. (2) of s. 80J had already expired ?
High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Metalways (P) Ltd. Section 80J(4) Asst. Years 1979-80, 1980-81 M.M. Kumar &
Sec. 10(26)
Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant corporation is not entitled for the benefit of exemption under s. 10(26B) of the IT Act, 1961 ?
High Court Of Gauhati Arunachal Pradesh Forest Corporation Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. Section 10(26B) P.G.
Sec. 10(26)
Gauhati H.C : the word “residing” connotes permanent residence relatable to the concept of “domicile”.
High Court Of Gauhati Smt. Dipti Doley Basumatary vs. Union Of India & Ors. Section 10(26), Art. 366(25) Asst. Year
Sec. 245C, Sec. 245D
Bombay H.C : the settlement applications filed by the petitioner in respect of its own assessments and the assessments of the two merging companies are not fit for admission on the ground that the case does not involve complexity and that there was no full and true disclosure by the petitioner
High Court Of Bombay Centurion Bank Of Punjab Ltd. vs. Income Tax Settlement Commission & Ors. Sections 245C, 245D Dr.
