Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

In favour of assessee/Matter remanded

Sec. 10(23C), Sec. 2(15)

Delhi H.C : the so called subsidized rates charged by the applicant forms almost 42% to 100% of the private charges which clearly shows that the same is beyond the reach of poor people, and cannot be termed as charity as envisaged in sec. 2(15) of the I.T. Act,

Avijit Das / March 8, 2017

High Court Of Delhi Venu Charitable Society vs. Director General of Income-tax Section 10(23C), 2(15) Assessment year 2011-12 S. Ravindra […]

S.C : the income tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been decided by the High Court without framing any substantial question of law. This, the appellant contends, is impermissible on the basis of several decisions of this Court including the one in “M.Janardhana Rao v. Jt. CIT” [2005] 142 Taxman 722

Avijit Das / October 21, 2016

Supreme Court Of India Jai Hind Cycle Co. Ltd. vs. CIT-A.P. -1, Hyderabad Section 260A Ranjan Gogoi And Abhay Manohar

Section 92C, Sec. 144C, Section 144

Andhra Pradesh & Telangana H.C : The proceedings issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 143(3) read with Section 144-C (13)

Avijit Das / August 31, 2016

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh And Telangana Rain Cements Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1), Hyderabad Section : 92C, 144C Assessment

Sec. 36(1)(vii), Sec. 36(1)(2), Sec. 36(1)(Viia), Section 254

Bombay H.C : Where Tribunal in respect of withdrawal of deduction under section 36(1)(viia), merely followed its order for preceding assessment year and upheld order passed by Commissioner in a casual manner, same was not justified; matter was to be remanded back to Tribunal

Avijit Das / December 17, 2014

High Court Of Bombay State Bank Of India Vs. DCIT Section : 36(1)(Vii)/(1)/(Viiia)/(2), 254 Assessment Year : 2006-07 S.C. Dharmadhikari

Allahabad H.C : The Liaison Office (‘LO’) was engaged in marketing/ promoting appellant’s products in India, the appellant was liable to tax in India on business income

Avijit Das / November 11, 2014

High Court Of Allahabad Brown And Sharpe Inc. Vs. CIT Section : 9 Assessment Year 2003-04 Dr. Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud,

Section 34A, Section 32

Madras H.C : Whether in view of restriction imposed in amended section 34A, set off of unabsorbed depreciation allowance or unabsorbed investment allowance had to be restricted to two third of such allowance

Avijit Das / September 8, 2014

High Court Of Madras CIT-III, Coimbatore Vs. Madras Forging & Allied Industries (Cbe) Ltd. Section : 34A, 32 Assessment Year

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Whether losses, if any, incurred in part of year 1996-97 preceding date of search same was to be adjusted for determining undisclosed income as well as for passing block assessment order

Avijit Das / September 3, 2014

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh Ch. Mohan Vs. ACIT, Circle 2(3), Hyderabad Section : 158BB Block Period : 1986-87 To

Sec. 37(1), Section 254

Bombay H.C : Assessee had not furnished details before Assessing Officer except copy of service agreement and debit notes and therefore, without making reference to record available before Commissioner (Appeals), Tribunal remanded matter back to Assessing Officer

Avijit Das / August 14, 2014

High Court Of Bombay Coca-Cola India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Registrar Representing Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Section 37(1),254 Assessment Years

Section 254, Section 154

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Tribunal could not refuse to address assessee’s plea merely by stating that it was raised for first time before Tribunal

Avijit Das / July 22, 2014

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh Smt. Kamalabai Loya Vs. CIT Section 254, 154 L. Narasimha Reddy And Challa Kodanda Ram,

Section 119, Sec. 234A, Sec. 234B, Sec. 234C

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Commissioner had power to waive interest or whether assessee had made out a case for such waiver, was totally outside purview of Scheme as what all it contemplated was that if concerned assessee was prepared to pay 50 per cent of tax arrears, benefit must be extended

Avijit Das / June 25, 2014

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh S. Prasad Reddy Vs. CIT, Hyderabad Section 119, 234A, 234B And 234C Assessment Year 1995-96

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top