The moot issue involved in these appeals, inter alia, is as to whether an undertaking or an enterprise, established after 7th January, 2003, carrying out substantial expansion within specified window period, i.e. between 7.1.2003 and 1.4.2012, would be entitled to deduction on profits @ 100%, under Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. Also, if so, then for what period.
Section 263 confers sufficient powers upon the Commissioner to decide all issues of law, after recording its satisfaction that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue.
Interest on securities and interest on head office investment account was made chargeable pursuant to Board’s instructions No. 1923 dated 14.3.1995 and as such, this Court sees no occasion for assessee Bank to declare same in its profit and loss account, wherein it had declared interest of Rs. 39.98 Crores, on approved securities for the period 1.10.1991 to 31.3.1992.
High Court held In the case of CIT vs. Rakesh Mahajan that the income or profits as ascertained and determined by the assessee himself cannot always be accepted as correct because it is the duty of the A.O. to consider whether the books disclose the true state of accounts and whether the correct
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Shree Triveni Foods held that the claim of depreciation for assessment years under dispute was not mandatory and therefore, the assessee could not be compelled to exercise the option as an obligation.
High Court held In the case of CIT vs. Ms Megha Dadoo that the product (Route Marker) produced by the assessee was commercially different from its raw material and also a commercially different product known in the market.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. State Bank of Patiala held that the exemption notification issued by Central Govt. allowing non-deduction of TDS in case of certain deductees has an automatic effect as soon as the same is issued and there is no such requirement in the act to obliging deductor to specifically apply for availing the benefit under that notification.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of RFCL Limited vs. CIT held that the important business information acquired by assessee in the course of business purchase are intangible assets as the same are in the nature of business or commercial rights of similar nature on which the assessee is eligible to claim depreciation.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of Anand Chauhan & others held that not providing assessee with the precise reason for transfer of his case from one jurisdiction to other amounts to violating the principles of natural justice as non-disclosure take away his right of putting forward his objections effectively.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Indus Cosmeceuticals held that the condition of employing atleast 10 workers as required to be complied with for claiming deduction u/s 80IB cannot be deemed to have complied by employing workers for a small part of year.
