Expense was classified under the head major repair and maintenance on the ground that the large expense was spent on repair and maintenance but the fact is that there was no enhancement in the capacity of the plant and machinery as well as no increase in the efficiency.
Section 35L is being amended so as to clarify that determination of disputes relating to tax ability or excisability of goods is covered under the term ‘determination of any question having a relation to rate of duty’ and hence, appeal against Tribunal orders in such matters would lie before the Supreme Court.
In the absence of any incriminating material unearthed during the course of search, the AO had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 153A of the Act when no assessment proceedings were pending for this.
Assessee to prove that it is covered by exceptions to chargeability to tax as is provided by provisions of Section 1 15BBC of 1961 Act, namely that the assessee maintained a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed or else it is a religious trust.
Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indian Visit Com Pvt Ltd (176 Taxman 164) held that in case of expenditure on website, there is no change in the fixed assets of the assessee and no asset has been created but it is a tool for facilitating the business of the assessee and therefore, held expenditure of website to be of revenue nature.
Value of the broken bottles need not be reduced from the written down value for the purpose of calculation of short term capital gains arising from sale of bottles.
While scrapping an order transferring a case from Delhi to Noida, the division bench of the Allahabad High Court held that the holding of the office of a director by the petitioner and his admission to the undisclosed income are not sufficient grounds for transferring a case under section 127 of the Income Tax Act.
expenditure incurred for organizing sports events are allowable items of revenue expenditure as such events publicise the names of the sponsor.
Even though it is a debatable issue but as Gujarat High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Mfg. & Calico (P) Ltd. (supra) had taken a view that it is capital expenditure which was subsequently followed by Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. V. CIT (supra) and the registered office of the respondent assessee being in the State of Gujarat, the law laid down by the Gujarat High Court was binding.
We are prima facie of the opinion that the activities of the assessee of Banquet Hall Hiring, Hospitality (Restaurants) and Permit Room (Bar) are in the nature of carrying on trade, commerce, or business for consideration, which are hit by proviso to Section 2(15) of 1961 Act.
