-
Deduction of Depreciation as well of Capital Expenditure in Case of Trusts not amounts to double deduction
ITO. (E) Vs. S.D.College Society, Lahore
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3552 (ITAT-DELHI)
-
Whether the individual assessees are entitled to blanket the order by demand of stay under the Circular No.96., taking into consideration that the difference between the income shown in the returns and assessment orders is very high.
DR AKILAN RAMANATHAN Vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-V
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3551 (HC-MADRAS) · Income Tax - Sections 68, 147, 148
-
Whether in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, Court can direct the statutory authorities to grant interest as outside the statute.
MERCK LTD., FORMERLY KNOWN AS E MERCK (P) LTD., TARKESHWAR SINGH Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI, THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF LAW
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3550 (HC-BOMBAY) · Income Tax - Sections 140A, 143(3), 243, 244(1), 244(1A)
-
Whether an assessee can be allowed deduction u/s 37(1), regarding expenditure incurred on telecommunication services, even if there were no business activities carried on by the assessee in that year.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –IV Vs. VODAFONE ESSAR GUJARAT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3549 (HC-GUJARAT) · Income Tax - Section 37(1)
-
Whether such deduction would be allowed in case neither of the events had taken place.
M/s COROMANDEL CEMENTS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3548 (HC-AP) · Income Tax - Sections 256(1)
-
Whether while granting the benefit to the charitable institution, when the legislature consciously provided for the funds of the said Trust by way of investment and they have fixed a limit of 5%, by placing an interpretation, said benefits can be denied to the assessee.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THE INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3547 (HC-KARNATAKA) · Income Tax - Sections 11, 12, 13(4), 5(i), 21A
-
Whether in the nature of manufacturing process carried out by the assessee, where the shelf life of the cast iron ingot moulds, which is used for about 30 to 40 times and, thereafter, scrapped, could be taken as capital asset or a revenue asset.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/s ADITYA FERRO ALLOYS PVT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3546 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Whether the rental income earned from leasing of such assets is to be treated as business income.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. TVS FINANCE AND SERVICES LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS HARITA FINANCE LTD. WHICH WAS FORMERLY KNOWN AS TVS LAKSHMI CREDIT LTD.)
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3545 (HC-MADRAS)
-
Whether deduction u/s 80I can be allowed on expansion of an existing manufacturing unit - Whether this would cause excess deduction u/s 80I.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (LARGE TAX PAYER UNIT) Vs. M/s LUBRIZOL INDIA LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3544 (HC-BOMBAY) · Income Tax - Sections 80I, 143(3), 260A
-
Whether deduction u/s 80HHC in the case of MAT Assessment has to be worked out on the basis of adjusted book profit and not on the basis of profit computed on regular basis.
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. M/s RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3543 (HC-BOMBAY) · Income Tax - Sections 80HHC, 115JB, 154
-
Whether in such a case, the authorized officer could not ask for extension of time for holding the documents beyond the prescribed period.
SHRI MAHESH KUMAR GOYAL & ORS. Vs. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) & ORS
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3542 (HC-CALCUTTA) · Income Tax - Sections 132(1), 132(9A), 254
-
Whether when the MAT liability of the assessee is found out only because of the alertness of the AO, the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) is legitimately warranted.
M/s SRI GOKULAM HOTELS INDIA PVT LTD. Vs. THE ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3541 (HC-MADRAS) · Income Tax - Sections 115JB, 143(2), 271(1)(c)
-
Whether the mere recording of the submission of the assessee, observation that disallowance on account of subscription to federation which was paid to the federation not in the course of carrying on any activity by the federation office as per explanation as given in section 194J, can be deleted.
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SARJOO SAHKARI CHINI MILL LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3540 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Income Tax - Sections 40(a)(ia), 194J, 260A
-
Whether non-communication thereof is saved by showing that the reasons existed in the files although not communicated to the assessee.
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3539 (HC-ALLAHABAD) · Income Tax - Sections 127, 147, 148
-
Whether the Tribunal has the power to extend or grant stay for a period beyond a period of 365 days.
CRM SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD. Vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3538 (HC-DELHI) · Income Tax - Section 254(2A)
-
Whether as per the provisions of section 43(6)(c), the receipt from Insurance Company towards claim against damage to building, plant and machinery is to be reduced from the block to the extent of additions made to the block of plant and machinery during the previous year.
M/s PRIYADARSHINI SPINNING MILLS LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3537 (HC-AP) · Income Tax - Sections 2(11), 32, 43(6), 256(1)
-
The amount of interest paid accrued was to be treated as deposit and, therefore, the provisions of section 194A were not attracted. The AO however, did not accept the assessee’s contentions.
DCIT Vs STATE BANK OF INDIA
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3536 (ITAT-DELHI) · Income Tax - Sections 33ABA, 194A, 197, 201, 201(1)(a)
-
Aggrieved by such adverse order resulting from binding precedent of this Tribunal, the revenue had preferred present appeal.
CIT. Vs IMPACT CONTAINERS PVT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3535 (HC-BOMBAY) · Income tax - Sections 2(22)(e), 2(6A)(e), 56, 143(1)
-
It was held that the assessee had acquired computers from HICS, who had also claimed depreciation on the said asset before they were transferred to the assessee.
CIT Vs HEARTLAND DELHI TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES PVT LTD.
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3534 (HC-DELHI) · Income Tax - Sections 10A, 10B
-
Mere admission of Appeal by High Court sufficient to disbar s. 271(1)(c) penalty
CIT vs. M/s Nayan Builders and Developers
(2014) TaxCorp(LJ) 3533 (HC-BOMBAY) · Section 271(1)(c)
Headnote lines are open to everyone. The full headnote and the judgment text open with a subscription — see plans or sign in.