Follow Us:

Judiciary

If Tribunal Passed An Order In Absence Of Appearance By The Appellant, It Had To Pass The Order On Merits

November 13, 2008 744 Views 0 comment Print

This petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India registers a challenge to the order dated August 23, 2007, passed by the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), dismissing four appeals being

Notional Liability On Account Of Change In Exchange Rates Could Not Be Allowed On Notional Basis

November 13, 2008 672 Views 0 comment Print

CIT vs Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd.- Business loss: Business expenditure – Notional Liability: Loss due to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates The assessee had borrowed funds in foreign exchange for the purpose of capital outlay.

Assessing officer not having reason to believe that the seized cash represented the undisclosed income and rejection of application for release of the same

November 11, 2008 811 Views 0 comment Print

This petition seeks a direction for releasing of 10 kgs. of silver jewellery, belonging to the petitioner but seized from his adoptive father on 20.11.1979 during search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (

ACIT Vs. Ashima Syntex Ltd. (ITAT Ahemdabad)

November 9, 2008 2855 Views 0 comment Print

Though the taxpayer may have written off the expenditure in its books of account over a period say of five years, it must be allowed in its entirety in the year in which it was incurred, if it is revenue expenditure, and if it is wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of business(Para 15)

Exchange Rate Difference Of Exports Made In Earlier Year – Whether Part Of Export Turnover?

November 6, 2008 928 Views 0 comment Print

ACIT v. Prakash L. Shah – The exchange rate difference pertaining to the exports made in the earlier year shall be part of the export turnover of the year in which such export is made provided such sale proceeds of the eligible goods are realized in India within the period of six months from the end of the previous year or within such further period as allowed by the Competent Authority.

M.M.T.C. Limited Vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax & Ors. (Supreme Court)

November 4, 2008 1585 Views 0 comment Print

It was held that the order was passed in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 against which the Letters Patent Appeal is not maintainable. The High Court was not justified in holding that the Letters Patent Appeal was not maintainable.

Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Company Vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) (2009) 308 ITR 38 (Del)

November 3, 2008 7061 Views 0 comment Print

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.-This writ petition is directed against the notice dated 29-3-2004 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-18, New Delhi under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘said Act’)

Merely because some optical fibre lines or connection lines have been laid, the road cannot get converted into a plant

October 24, 2008 618 Views 0 comment Print

11. We have carefully perused the agreement entered into by the assessee company with the Government of Tamil Nadu vide concession agreement dated 22-12-2000. In this agreement Article 1 deals with the definition of project as defined under:- ” Project” – means the project described in Appendix 1 which the concessionaire is required to design,

Interest earned on margin money kept for providing bank guarantee is not exempt

October 24, 2008 5006 Views 0 comment Print

undisputedly, the assessing officer has not initiated proceedings under S.14S of the Act, to lax the interest income of Rs.25,83,848 earned on margin money. In fact, the assessing officer has initiated the proceedings under S.148 to bring to tax the reimbursement of income-tax from APTRANSCO. However, during the course of re-assessment proceedings, the assessing officer also noticed that the assessee has earned interest income of Rs.25,83,848 on margin money kept by it for providing bank guarantee in favour of APTRANSCO, in respect of which it has claimed deduction from the total interest income received during the year under consideration.

NICHOLAS PIRAMEL (I) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (CESTAT MUMBAI)

October 23, 2008 2484 Views 0 comment Print

NICHOLAS PIRAMEL (I) LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, THANE-I- The provisions of Rules 6(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 are not applicable when the amount equivalent of the Cenvat Credit attributable to the common inputs used in, or in relation to, the manufacture of exempted final products has been paid prior to the removal of exempted final products from the factory.

Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031