CIT vs. Vaish Associates (Delhi High Court) A plain reading of Clause 6(a) leads to a conclusion that the term’ allocable profits’ was used to mean ‘book profits’ as used in Section 40(b)(v)of the Act or otherwise the reference to the section in the Clause has no meaning.
In the case of Avinash Gupta and Ors V/s Union of India and Ors It was held by Delhi High Court that in this case it is pleaded that the petition is in the nature of public interest. However, the petition is not drafted as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
A search took place on 14.02.2006 in the premises of M/s Radico Khaitan.In the course of these search proceedings, various documents including reports narrating amounts alleged to have been received or receivable from various members of the UPDA and the basis thereof were recovered.
In the of CIT Vs. Noida Medicare Centre Ltd, Delhi High Court held that the AO erred in disallowing the capitalization of the additional customs duty in the manner claimed by the Assessee and adding the entire customs duty paid in the relevant AY to the income of the Assessee.
In the case of Rampgreen Solutions Pvt Ltd vs CIT, Delhi High Court inter-alia held that the expression ‘BPO’ and ‘KPO’ are, plainly, understood in the sense that whereas, BPO does not necessarily involve advanced skills
Delhi High Court held in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT that No disallowance u/s 14A can be made in a year in which no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. Section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 does not apply to shares bought for strategic purposes.
Bhumika Enterprises Vs Commissioner Value Added Tax & Anr In a major relief to VAT dealers in the State of Delhi, the High Court of Delhi has quashed the system generated assessment orders issued by the VATO.
Delhi High Court held in CIT Vs DLF Universal Ltd held that If assessee got hundi from its suppliers and get it discounted from the bank ,then the discounting charges paid by the assessee would be treated as a revenue expense;
Delhi High Court In the case of Mool Chand Khairati Ram Trust vs DIT (Exemptions) held that Assessee would not be entitled to exemption under Section 11 of the IT Act if its activities are outside the scope of its objects, even if its activities are charitable in nature.
In the case of CIT Vs. MGF Automobiles Ltd., Delhi High Court upheld the order of the ITAT that the additions could have been made by the AO only if some incriminating document was found during search.
