Supreme Court of India

Hire purchase transaction liable to imposition of Sales Tax- SC

M/s. Jay Bharat Credit And Investment Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Sales-Tax & Anr. (Supreme Court of India)

Sale price means the amount payable to a dealer as consideration for transfer of goods on hire purchase. The word sale occurring in Sec. 2(h) must have the meaning ascribed to it as in Section 2(g) when the word sale includes transfer of goods on hire purchase, then whatever is the amount which is paid/payable to the dealer on such a tran...

Read More

Bharat Earth Movers vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Supreme Court)

Bharat Earth Movers Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Supreme Court of India)

Law is settled- If a business liability has definitely arisen in the accounting year, the deduction should be allowed although the liability may have to be quantified and discharged at a future date. What should be certain is the incurring of the liability. It should also be capable of being estimated with reasonable certainty though the ...

Read More

M/s. Chelmsford Club Vs CIT (Supreme Court)

M/S. Chelmsford Club Vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Supreme Court of India)

The High Court relying on Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and following the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of C.I.T., U.P. v. Wheeler Club Limited {(1963) 49 ITR 52} and some observations of the Delhi High Court in the case of C.I.T., Delhi-II v. Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd. (155 ITR 3...

Read More

Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation Vs. CIT – Supreme Court

Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation Vs. CIT (Supreme Court of India)

Shri C.S. Vaidyanathan, Shri Ashok Desai, Shri V. Gauri Shankar, Dr. D.P. Pal, Shri Joseph Vellapally, Shri K.N. Shukla, Shri Pallav Shishodia, Shri A.P. Medh, Ms. Priya Hingorani, Shri B.K. Prasad, Shri S.N. Terdol, Shri S. Rajappa, Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Shri N.L. Garg, Shri C.V. Subba Rao, Shri Ranbir Chandra, Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Shri S....

Read More

Beneficial ownership is relevant than legal ownership to claim depreciation – SC

Mysore Minerals Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-tax (Supreme Court of India)

The appellant-assessee is a private limited company. During the assessment year 1981-82 (accounting year ending on March 31, 1981), the assessee had purchased for the use of its staff seven low income group houses from the Housing Board. The assessee had made part payments and was in turn made allotment of the houses followed by delivery ...

Read More

Rainbow Colour Lab & Anr Vs. State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors -Supreme Court

M/S. Rainbow Colour Lab & Anr vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors (Supreme Court of India)

Common questions involved in these appeals are whether the job rendered by a photographer in taking photographs, developing and printing films would amount to a works contract as contemplated under Article 366(2A)(b) of the Constitution read with Section 2(n) of the M.P.General Sales Tax for the purpose of levy of sales tax on business tu...

Read More

S.195 TDS is deductible only on Taxable Portion

Transmission Corporation Of A.P. Ltd. And Anr. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, A.P. (Supreme Court of India)

Answers given by the High Court that (i) the assessee who made the payments to the three non-residents was under obligation to deduct tax at source under Section 195 of the Act in respect of the sums paid to them under the contracts entered into; and (ii) the obligation of the respondent-assessee to deduct tax under Section 195 is limited...

Read More

Reference to document outside the record & law impermissible when applying provision of section 154

Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Keshri Metal Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)

CIT V Keshri Metal Pvt Ltd. (1999) 237 ITR 165 SC- Under the provisions of Section 154 there has to be a mistake apparent from the record. In other words, a look at the record must show there has been an error, and that error may be rectified. Learned counsel for the revenue has not been able to satisfy us that it shows any apparent error...

Read More

Audits cannot be performed by Income Tax Practitioners as special aptitude training retained by Chartered Accountants only

T.D. Venkata Rao Vs. Union Of India (Supreme Court)

The current Section 44AB of the IT Act has been challenged by the Appellant on behalf of the Income Tax Practitioners. The Appellant contends that the Income Tax Practitioners should be entitled to be authorized representatives and that they are excluded for auditing accounts which violates their Fundamental Rights, specifically Article 1...

Read More

Mere Lapse of litigant not enough to not to condone delay in filing of Appeal

N.Balakrishnan vs. M.Krishnamurthy (Supreme Court of India)

It must be remembered that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy the court must show utmost consideration to ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (6,104)
Company Law (8,419)
Corporate Law (10,377)
Custom Duty (9,341)
DGFT (4,825)
Excise Duty (4,785)
Fema / RBI (5,254)
Finance (5,636)
Income Tax (41,974)
SEBI (4,531)
Service Tax (4,002)

Search Posts by Date

August 2022