Allowbility of kickbacks/secret commission as business expenditure under section 37(1) of IT Act

Kusum R. Ghuwalewala Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai 'F' Bench)

"37. (1) Any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described in sections 30 to 36 and not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee), laid but or expended wholly and. exclusively for the purposes of the business or profession shall be allowed in computing the income chargeable under the he...

Read More

Power of Commissioner under section 263 of Income-tax Act

Rajesh Goyal & Sons Vs CIT (ITAT Agra)

8. Having carefully examined the entire evidences available on the record in the light of the oral submissions of the parties, with reference to the provisions of law and the precedents relied before us and after giving anxious thought, in the light of the plain words used in section 263 of the Act and in the light of the ratio of the ...

Read More

Applicability of section 292B of IT Act in case return contains any mistake, defect or omission

Nicholas Applegate South East Asia Fund Limited Vs Assistant Director of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai)3875/Mum/2005 (23/01/2009)

Nicholas Applegate South East Asia Fund Limited Vs Assistant Director of Income Tax (ITAT Mumbai) - The question of application of section 292B cannot be prejudged by finding that return, notice, etc. is not as per the requirement of the statute and is/are invalid; the finding that the return or notice etc. is invalid or to what extent it...

Read More

When an order can be said to be erroneous for exercise of power of revision under section 263 of IT Act : ITAT Mumbai

Pravin Navin Investments & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai 'C' Bench)

9.1 From plain reading of sub-section (1) of section 263, it is clear that the power of suo motu revision can be exercised by the Commissioner only if, on examination of the records of any proceedings under this Act, he considers that any order passed therein by the Income-tax Officer is ` erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the i...

Read More

S. 115JA assessment is not liable for advance tax interest u/s 234B and 234C

Snowcem vs. DCIT (Bombay High Court)

There is a difference between dismissal of a Special Leave Petition and dismissal of an Appeal. While the dismissal of a SLP does not result in merger of the judgment of the High Court with that of the Supreme Court and there is no affirmation, the dismissal of an Appeal results in an affirmation and merger of the order of the High Court ...

Read More

Advances to sister concerns must be presumed to have come out of own funds and not borrowed funds

CIT vs. Reliance Utilities (Bombay High Court)

Where the assessee had its own funds as well as borrowed funds and it advanced funds to its sister concerns for allegedly non-business purposes and the question arose whether the AO was justified in disallowing the interest on the borrowed funds on the ground that they had been used for non-business purposes, HELD: Where an assessee has ...

Read More

Reopening notice even if served after limitation period is valid: HC DELHI

Mayawati vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)

(i) S. 149, which imposes the limitation period, requires the notice to be “issued” but not “served” within the limitation period. Once a notice is issued within the period of limitation, jurisdiction becomes vested in the AO to proceed to reassess. Service is not a condition precedent to conferment of jurisdiction but it is a con...

Read More

“Sham” lease transactions cannot be given relief as “financial arrangements”.

M Corp Global Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-tax, Ghaziabad (Supreme Court of India)

2. This civil appeal filed by the assessee is directed against judgment and order dated 22.9.2006 in ITA No. 164/04 by the Delhi High Court. By the impugned judgment, confirming the decision of the Tribunal, the High Court has held that the appellant (assessee) is not entitled to claim depreciation under Section 32(1)(ii) of the Income-ta...

Read More

Exercise of revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of Income Tax Act, 1961

Flextronics Software System Ltd. Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi 'C' Bench)

(ii) where proper enquiries have been conducted by the Assessing Officer and he has followed the principles of natural justice, the order passed by him cannot be said to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue simply because the ld. Commissioner does not agree with him and he is of the view that addition of a higher amoun...

Read More

Computation of profit in case of construction contracts

Ramniklal J. Nathwani v. ITO (ITAT Mumbai 'D' Bench)

13.5 That in the case of running contracts, no income, profits or gains can in fact be computed unless the contract is completed and if the contract is completed in a period of more than a year, the crucial time for calculating the income, profits and gains arrives only when the entire contract is completed in other words, argument was th...

Read More
Page 924 of 950« First...102030...922923924925926...930940950...Last »

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (3,354)
Company Law (3,238)
Custom Duty (6,410)
DGFT (3,340)
Excise Duty (3,989)
Fema / RBI (3,152)
Finance (3,316)
Income Tax (24,362)
SEBI (2,658)
Service Tax (3,261)

Search Posts by Date

April 2017
« Mar