Tag: 378 ITR

Delhi H.C : Did the Tribunal fall into error of law in holding that the expenditure on interest claimed by the Assessee could not be allowed in terms of Section 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

High Court Of Delhi Vodafone South Ltd. vs. CIT Section : 57 Assessment Years : 2002-03 To 2003-04 Dr. S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 334 & 336 Of 2014 Cm Nos. 10693 & 10696 Of 2014 September 21, 2015 ORDER Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. – These are two appeals filed by the …
Read More...

Delhi H.C : The time prescribed for filing the Income Tax Returns under Section 139(1) in the form of “Due Date” is the constitutional and statutory right of the Assessee

High Court Of Delhi Avinash Gupta vs. Union Of India Assessment Year : 2015-16 Section : 139, 119 Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. W.P. (C) No. 9032 Of 2015 September 21, 2015 ORDER CM No.20437/2015 (for exemption) 1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2. The CM stands disposed of. W.P.(C) No. 9032/2015 & CM No.20436/2015 (for stay) …
Read More...

S.C : Search operation under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was carried out at various premises of the Time Video Group, one Shri Dhirajlal N. Shah made a statement on August 25, 1995

Supreme Court Of India Video Master vs. JCIT Block Period : 1-1-1985 To 24-8-1995 Section : 158BC A.K. Sikri And Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 94 Of 2007 September 16, 2015 ORDER 1. This appeal concerns M/s. Video Master, a partnership firm, which is the assessee and the appellant before us. The controversy relates …
Read More...

Bombay H.C : The assumption of jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Act, by the CIT is not valid and that the assessee has not committed any legal error by uniformly and consistently following ‘Project Completion Method’ when he should have followed ‘Percentage Completion Method’ as per Accounting Standard 9

High Court Of Bombay CIT – 15 vs. Aditya Builders Assessment Year : 2007-08 Section : 144. 263 M.S. Sanklecha And G.S. Kulkarni, JJ. IT Appeal No.1738 Of 2013 September 14, 2015 JUDGMENT 1. This appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) challenges the order dated 6 February 2013 passed …
Read More...

Bombay H.C : The Tribunal was justified in upholding the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)’s order and treating the Gains from Share Transactions as Short Term Capital Gain whereas it was to be taxed under the head “Business Income”

High Court Of Bombay CIT-16 vs. Smt. Datta Mahendra Shah Assessment Year : 2008-09 Section : 45, 28(i) M.S. Sanklecha And G.S. Kulkarni, JJ. IT Appeal No. 1601 Of 2013 September 9, 2015 ORDER 1. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 27th February,2013 passed by the …
Read More...

Karnataka H.C : Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in disallowing interest on borrowed loan on the facts and circumstances of the case?

High Court Of Karnataka Embassy Development Corporation vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2(3), Bangalore Assessment Years : 2000-01 To 2002- 03 Section : 36(1)(iii) Vineet Saran And B. Manohar, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 465, 720 & 721 Of 2009 (It) September 8, 2015 JUDGMENT 1. The assessee has preferred these appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax …
Read More...

Bombay H.C : Section 40(a)(i), is not applicable, particularly when section 172 concerned with levy and recovery of tax in a case of any ship, as against section 195 r/w 40(a) (i) of the IT Act, refers to non-resident Assessee as in the present case

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. (P.) Ltd. Assessment Years : 1999-2000 And 2000-01 Section : 172, 195 M.S. Sanklecha And G.S. Kulkarni, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 989 & 991 Of 2015 Original Tax Appeal Nos. 58 & 60 Of 2007 September 8, 2015 ORDER M.S. Sanklecha, J. – The challenge in …
Read More...

Kerala H.C : the assessee whose contribution towards PF/ESI is not in consonance with the provisions of the Explanation to section 36(1)(va) is entitled to claim deduction of the same under Sec. 43B of the Income Tax Act

High Court Of Kerala CIT, Cochin vs. Merchem Ltd. Section : 36(1)(va), 2(24)(x), 43B Assessment Year : 2010-11 Antony Dominic And Shaji P. Chaly, JJ. IT Appeal No. 244 Of 2014 September 8, 2015 JUDGMENT Shaji P. Chaly, J. — This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, …
Read More...
Malcare WordPress Security