Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.32 seconds)
Documents citing G. Venkata Bhooma Reddy vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Andhra ... on 5 January, 1961

Laiphrakpam Leiren Singh And Ors. vs Nongthombom Leiren Singh And Ors. on 9 December, 1966

In Venkata Snbba Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1960 Andh Pra 500, the documents were referred to by the S. D. M. But, he ignored the affidavits, which constituted the material evidence in the case. He did not take them into consideration. It was held that ex facie the order was improper and that there was miscarriage of justice, because the Magistrate did not fake into consideration the affidavits filed by the parties.
Gauhati High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Banshidhar Sewbhagawan And Co. on 7 April, 1976

In support of his submission the learned counsel for the respondent has mainly relied upon Mohanlal Hargovind of f Jubbulpore v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1949] 17 ITR 473 (PC), G. Venkata Bhooma Reddy v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1961] 43 ITR 100 (AP), Commissioner of Income-tax v. Panbari Tea Company Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 422 (SC), M. A. fabbar v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1968] 68 ITR 493 (SC), Devidas Vithaldas & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1972] 84 ITR 277 (SC) and Mewar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1973] 87 ITR 400 (SC).
Gauhati High Court Cites 22 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Knight Riders Sports P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Asst Cit Cen Cir 29, Mumbai on 29 December, 2017

 Securing a right for carrying on the business would be on revenue account: KRSPL pays for the right to participate in the tournament for the current year without the guarantee that in future years it will also be eligible to participate in the tournament. The expenditure incurred by KRSPL in the course of carrying on the business. The expenditure is not incurred to acquire the rights but to ensure that there is a steady stream of revenue. The acquisition of rights, if any, under the Agreement does not amount to acquisition of an asset in the capital field. There are several decisions in which it has been held that payments made for securing the right to supply of raw materials for several years would be on revenue account - Supreme Court decision in case of in Gotan Lime Syndicate Vs. CIT 59 ITR 718 and M. A. Jabbar Vs. CIT 68 ITR 493, and of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in G. Venkata Bhooma Reddy Vs. CIT 43 ITR 100. The courts have held that there is a distinction between payments made for acquiring a capital asset and therefore capital expenditure and payment for securing raw material and therefore revenue expenditure.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 44 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1