Madras High Court held in CIT Vs Ms Vidya Thangakumar that it would vary from case to case that whether the land in the hand of assessee is a capital asset or business stock. In the present case the assessee had got the land under settlement and it had to sell the land
The assessee is engaged in the manufacture of automobile parts and components. The assessee cleared waste and scrap and replacement of defective products without payment of duty. The period in question pertains to September, 1998.
Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s Southern Petrochemicals Industries Corporation Ltd held that market research expense incurred to increase the efficiency of the existing business product line, the same should be treated as revenue expense.
Madras High Court held in CIT Vs Funskool (I) Ltd (Madras High Court) that for calculating the cost of the finished product the process of designing or stickering which had been used to design or give a final look to the finished product
Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs M/s Ambattur Clothing Limited held that for calculating the assessed tax priority has to be given to adjust the MAT credit then TDS and advance tax would be adjusted by relying on the decision of Supreme Court
The assessee Integral Coach Factory (ICF) belonging to the Central Government is engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger coaches both self-propelled and non-propelled, steel freight containers and parts of passenger coaches for railways under Chapter 86 of CET 1985.
In the case of M/s.Thiru Arooran Sugars Vs. The Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hon’ble Madras High Court held that CENVAT credit on capital goods used in the erection of various capital goods, viz., M.S.Plates, M.S.Angles, M.S.Channels and H.R. Plates, which were purchased
In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise & Service Tax Vs. M/s. Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd., Hon’ble Madras High Court held that the CENVAT credit of the service tax paid in respect of cell phone services, catering services
In the case of M/s.Karur K.C.P.Packagings Limited vs. The Commissioner of Customs, it was held by Madras High Court that that where any drawback payable to the claimant is not paid within a period of one month from the date of filing a claim for payment
Hon’ble High Court while interprating section 48 held that while calculating Capital gain the expenses made will only be considered if it is made wholly or exclusive for that property. Also, the Hon’ble High Court held that The Hon’ble Tribunal was right in taking into consideration of the Judgement of Jurisdictional High Court.
