Jawand Sons vs CIT
Validity of: Re-asstt. – Law applicable w.e.f. 01-04-1989-Wrong deduction allowed-AY 2001-2002. The re-asstt proceedings were validly initiated on discovery that wrong deduction under s.80-IB had been allowed in respect of Duty draw [LexDoc Id : 394961]
CIT vs Hindustan Computers Ltd.
Penalty: Concealment of income-Bona fide explanation of assessee, Valuation of: closing stock-Ay-1981-1982. The Tribunal gave a finding that there was no concealment since additions made were adjusted in value of closing stock. The explanation [LexDoc Id : 387689]
CIT vs TCM Ltd.
Limitation for: Re-asstt.-Finding of Court-AY 1979-1980. Certain sum was included in AY 1977-1978. The assessee returned that income in AY 1979-1980. This was excluded by AO In 1998, the High C [LexDoc Id : 402871]
HC (Kerala)
2009
CIT vs Mentha and Allied Products
Depreciation allowance-Trial run-The machinery was used for trial run. It was entitled to depreciation allowance.
S.32 of the Income Tax Act 1961
[LexDoc Id : 397709]
HC (Allahabad)
2009
P. Kuknhappa Nair and Co. vs DCIT and Anr.
Powers of Trial Court-Applicability of Apex Court’s judgment-The trial court hearing offences under I.T.Act, could examine whether a particular judgment of the Apex Court was applicable to case on hand.
Ss. [LexDoc Id : 390618]
HC (Kerala)
2009
C.B. Richard Ellis Mauritius Ltd. vs DDIT
Business expenditure-Increased liability: Fluctuations in exchange rate-The increased liability for expenses incurred due to change in foreign exchange rates was deductible as business expenditure.
S.28(i) and s.37(1) [LexDoc Id : 390413]
Express Newspapers Ltd. vs DCIT and ITAT
Powers of Tribunal-Rectification vis-à-vis- Review or recall of an order-AY 1985-86.
The Tribunal could rectify an apparent mistake in its order but had no power to review it. In case of an issue which is debatable i.e [LexDoc Id : 377632]
CIT vs Bharat Lal Dagar (HUF)
Penalty : Concealment of income-Disputed accrual of income-A.Y.2002-2003. The assessee had received certain compensation on acquisition of his land. The amount received was to be disputed in appeal. The assess [LexDoc Id : 414817]
HC (Punjab and Haryana)
2009
CIT vs Rajiv Agnihotri
Validity of : Revision by CIT-Absence of specific error/defect in A. O.'s order-A.Y.2001-2002. Where the CIT did not paint out any specific defect in the asstt. order, he could not set aside the same
S.263 of the Income Tax A [LexDoc Id : 408995]
HC (Punjab and Haryana)
2009
CIT vs Dhanalakshmi Weaving Works
Interest on borrowed capital and Interest on Deposits-Deposits from: Withdrawals from Overdraft A/C etc.-AY 2001-2002. The assessee had paid interest on borrowings. It had also earned interest on term deposits made out of overdraft account and packing cre [LexDoc Id : 405935]
HC (Kerala)
2009
CIT vs Vanaja Textiles Ltd.
Scope of: Intimation under s.143(1)-Belated claim of deduction-AY 1984-1985 and 1985-1986. The claim of deduction under s.32A was made much beyond period of limitation. Certain expenses were claimed without statin [LexDoc Id : 392699]
HC (Kerala)
2009
CIT vs C. Vijayan and Co.
Validity of: Remand by tribunal-Opportunity granted by CIT(A)-AY 2001-2002. Adequate opportunity to prove its case was given to the assessee by CIT(A). The Tribunal however, remanded the case to give one more opp [LexDoc Id : 392670]
CIT vs Lakhani India Ltd.
Deduction on actual payments-Contributions to PF-AY 2003-04. The payment of employees and employees contributions to P.F. made after due date but before the due date under s.139(1) could not be disal [LexDoc Id : 385577]
HC (Punjab and Haryana)
2009
CIT vs H.B. Stock Holdings Ltd. (No. 2)
Validity of: Re-asstt.-Change of: Head of income-AY 1995-1996. The CIT(A) gave a finding that the assessee sold were held as investment. The surplus assessed as capital gains. The notice under s.148 [LexDoc Id : 378055]
