378 ITR – Page 4 – taxcaselaw.com

Delhi H.C : The return filed by the Assessee was taken up for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer (hereafter ‘AO’) passed the assessment order dated 23rd October, 2009 under Section 143(3) of the Act making certain disallowances with respect to prior period expenses

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Pasupati Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd. Assessment Year : 2007-08 Section : 41(1) Dr. S.Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal No. 735 Of 2014 August 11, 2015 ORDER 1. The Revenue has preferred the present appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’) impugning an …

Bombay H.C : The assessee was not entitled to a deduction of Rs. 23,34,615/- when computing its income chargeable to tax

High Court Of Bombay Sandvik Asia Ltd. vs. DCIT, Spl. Rg.2, Pune Assessment Year : 1990-91 Section : 37(1), 43(1) M.S.Sanklecha And N.M. Jamdar, JJ. IT Appeal No. 1337 Of 2000 August 11, 2015 JUDGMENT M. S. Sanklecha, J. – This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 S.R.JOSHI 1 of 19 (the …

Delhi H.C : How the deduction has been claimed under section 43B of the Act?

High Court Of Delhi CIT-V vs. Rathi Graphics Technologies Ltd. Assessment Year : 2002-03 Section : 43B, 147 S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 780 And 785 Of 2014 August 6, 2015 ORDER 1. These appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) by the Revenue is directed against an order …

Delhi H.C : the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘CIT (A)’] and affirmed by the ITAT of addition made by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) of Rs. 30,450 and Rs. 46,40,822 under Section 43(B) of the Act on account of delayed contribution of ESI, provident fund (‘PF’) and superannuation fund

High Court Of Delhi CIT-ii vs. Modi Rubber Ltd. Assessment Year : 2001-02 Section : 36(1)(iii), 37(1), 43B Dr. S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal No. 259 Of 2014 August 4, 2015 ORDER Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. – This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is …

Delhi H.C : Which AY can the Assessee capitalize the customs duty levied on import of hospital equipment and claim depreciation?

High Court Of Delhi CIT-XIII vs. Noida Medicare Centre Ltd. Assessment Year : 2009-10 Section : 32 Dr. S. Muralidhar And Vibhu Bakhru, JJ. IT Appeal No. 529 Of 2014 August 4, 2015 ORDER 1. This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) is directed against an order dated …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether the transactions in hand envisage a “transfer” exigible to tax by reference to Section 2(47)(v) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

High Court Of Punjab And Haryana C.S. Atwal vs. CIT, Ludhiana Assessment Year : 2007-08 Section : 2(47), 45 Ajay Kumar Mittal And Fateh Deep Singh, JJ. IT Appeal No. 200 Of 2013 (O & M) July 22, 2015 JUDGMENT Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. – This order shall dispose of a bunch of 85 appeals bearing …

Madras H.C : When the statute is clear as to what benefits a manufacturer/supporting manufacturer is entitled to, can the benefits which are exclusively made available to a manufacturer under sub section 3 of Section 80HHC can be extended by any fiction to a supporting manufacturer?

High Court Of Madras CIT, Chennai vs. Devi Marine Food Exports Ltd. Assessment Year : 1994-95 Section : 80HHC R. Sudhakar And Ms. K.B.K. Vasuki, JJ. Tax Case (Appeal) No.355 Of 2006 July 14, 2015 JUDGMENT R. Sudhakar, J. – This Tax Case (Appeal) filed by the Revenue as against the order of the Income Tax …

Madras H.C : Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in considering the payments made by the appellant to M/s. Pyramid Saimira Entertainment Ltd., as capital expenditure and therefore incapable of being allowed as deduction under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

High Court Of Madras Seven Arts Films vs. ACIT, Media Circle-II, Chennai Assessment Year : 2009-10 Section : 37(1) R. Sudhakar And Ms. K.B.K. Vasuki, JJ. T.C.A. No. 613 Of 2014 M.P. No. 1 Of 2014 July 7, 2015 JUDGMENT R. Sudhakar, J. – Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal in allowing the appeal filed …

Madras H.C : Insistence of financier to repay the loan in cash is a compelling circumstances and is a reasonable cause for transacting the loan transaction in cash and thereby deleting the levy of penalty under Section 271E

High Court Of Madras CIT, Pondicherry vs. M. Ramakrishnan Assessment Years : 2008-09 And 2009-10 Section : 269T, 271E, 269SS, 271D R. Sudhakar And Ms. K.B.K. Vasuki, JJ. TC (A) Nos. 291,292 & 325 Of 2015 July 1, 2015 JUDGMENT Ms. K.B.K.Vasuki, J. – The assesee is the appellant herein. 2. Consequent to a survey conducted …

Madras H.C : the income of the assessee Trust fell within the ambit of amended provisions of Section 2 (15) of the Act and that the assessee trust has violated the provisions of Section 13 (1) (c) of the Act. On a challenge made to the assessing order, the Commissioner allowed the appeal in favour of the Trust.

High Court Of Madras Natya Sankalpaa vs. DIT.(Exemptions), Chennai Assessment Year : 2009-10 Section : 13 R. Sudhakar And Ms. K.B.K. Vasuki, JJ. Tax Case (Appeal) No. 1040 Of 2014 June 17, 2015 JUDGMENT R. Sudhakar, J. – The appellant assessee Trust was formed by Smt. Urmila Sathyanarayanan for promoting Bharatanatyam and other forms of Indian …

Tag: 378 ITR