Income Tax : Supreme Court clarifies Section 80HHC deduction for Export-Oriented Units, emphasizing that profits eligible for deduction must be...
Income Tax : In the last quarter of the financial year 2000-0 1, a serious controversy arose in the Income-Tax Department and export circles of...
Income Tax : In the present case, according to the Finance Minister presenting the Bill, a valid piece of legislation has been wrongly interpre...
Income Tax : The Tribunal upheld the set-off of eligible unit losses against other business profits by following binding judicial precedents....
Income Tax : The Calcutta High Court held that sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 1993 was a capital receipt as it was...
Income Tax : The Karnataka High Court held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be exercised where the Assessing Officer has adopted...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that provisions for bad and doubtful debts must be added back while computing book profits under Sectio...
Income Tax : The dispute concerned whether deduction under Section 80IB should be reduced by the amount already allowed under Section 80HHC. IT...
The Tribunal upheld the set-off of eligible unit losses against other business profits by following binding judicial precedents.
The Calcutta High Court held that sales tax remission under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme, 1993 was a capital receipt as it was intended to encourage capital investment and industrial expansion. It also decided the Section 80IA/80HHC issue in favour of the assessee.
The Karnataka High Court held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be exercised where the Assessing Officer has adopted one of the possible legal views. The Commissioner’s revisional order and the Tribunal’s order were quashed.
The Madras High Court held that provisions for bad and doubtful debts must be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JA because of the retrospective amendment introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009. However, it permitted audit reports for deduction claims to be filed at the appellate stage.
The dispute concerned whether deduction under Section 80IB should be reduced by the amount already allowed under Section 80HHC. ITAT held that deductions can be computed independently, provided the aggregate deduction does not exceed eligible profits.
The Madras High Court held that taxable income was not properly computed where deduction under Section 80IB was reduced before calculating Section 80HHC relief. The matter was remanded for fresh assessment in line with the Supreme Court ruling in Shital Fibers Ltd.
The court examined whether reassessment could be initiated after four years based on existing records. It held that reopening founded on a change of opinion is impermissible, and such reassessment was quashed. The ruling reinforces limits on reassessment powers.
The issue was whether reassessment could be initiated after four years without fresh evidence. The court held such reopening invalid when based on existing records and no failure of disclosure.
The court held that electricity tariff for determining market value must include all components, including duty. It ruled that excluding such elements artificially reduces eligible deduction.
ITAT Bangalore held that interest on bank deposits from operational funds of a co-operative credit society is eligible for deduction u/s 80P, as it is attributable to business activity; reliance on Totgars was held inapplicable.
