Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.55 seconds)
Documents citing Phillips India Ltd. (Earlier Punjab ... vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax on 21 October, 2004

Rolls Royce Indl. Power (I) Ltd., vs Assessee

35. Meakens Phillips vs. Asstt. CIT (International Taxation) [2006] 287 ITR 227 (Mumbai)(AT) [sic-McKinsey & Co. Inc.(Philippines) vs. Asstt. Director of IT [2006] 99 TTJ (Mumbai) 857 : [2006] 284 ITR 227 (Mumbai)(AT) It was held that when there was no material to suggest that the payment was for any services which enable the recipients of those services to apply the technology itself. It cannot be concluded that the consideration paid for such consultancy services was taxable in India under art. 12(4)(b) as included services under the DTAA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 102 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Emec Private Limited, Kolkata vs Department Of Income Tax on 28 October, 2011

(a) As all three years loss returns were filed out of time allowed u/s 139(3) hence the returns are non-est. The provision of sec. 139(4) does apply to loss returns. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in B.B. Danganavar Vs. I.T.O, reported in 65 ITR 370 (SC) at 377 and the decision of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in the case of MP Industries Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT reported in 222 ITR page 328 at page 332 and 333 are cited, the decisions of the same are mentioned in paper Book pages 2 & 3.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

The Hasti Co.Op. Bank Ltd.,, vs Department Of Income Tax on 2 May, 2016

Sindhudurg vs. Income-tax Officer, Wd. 2(4) Kudal [ItA No. 617 lPN/II/A. Y. 2007- 08] dt.02-03-2012 of ITAT PUNE; New India Industries Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2007) 112 ITJ (Del)(SB) 917; Karnataka Bank Ltd Vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (2013) 94 DTR (Kat) 448 dt. 11th March 2013. In view of the principle laid down in the decisions cited supra, am of the considered view that guideline issued by the RBI cannot override the provision of the I T Act and appellant has to follow the provision of Income-tax Act, while computing income for the purposes of Income tax Act. Therefore, A.O's view is not tenable.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Samarth Sahkari Bank Ltd.,, Aurangabad vs Department Of Income Tax on 24 September, 2013

16. Special Bench, Delhi in the case of New India Industries Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2007) 112 TTJ (Del) (SB) 917 : (2008) 1 DTR (Del)(SB)(Trib) 247 : (2007) 18 SOT 51 (Del)(SB) : 2007-TIOL-389-ITAT-DEL-SB had an occasion to consider the binding nature of RBI guidelines. The Special Bench held that RBI guidelines in respect of provision for NPA are not binding in the computation of income under the IT Act. Income is to be assessed as per the provision of the IT Act. The Madras High Court in the 4 case of T.N. Power Finance & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

G.E. Money Financial Services Pvt. ... vs Acit, New Delhi on 7 May, 2018

8. In the present case with the assessee has filed his return of income on 31st of October 2008 was a decision of the coordinate bench wherein it has been held that provision on the non-performing asset is an allowable expenditure. The assessee has also put in a note in the computation of Page | 5 total income mentioning the decision as well as the claim of the assessee. Therefore, at the time of filing of the return of income it is apparent that assessee was under bona fide belief that the above claim is allowable to the assessee, which is also supported by the decision of the coordinate bench. Subsequently there is a change in the judicial precedent and the matter reached up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court where in case of Southern technologies versus ACIT 320 ITR 577 Hon'ble Supreme Court in the such deduction is not allowable if it is not in accordance with the provisions of the income tax act. However, there the dispute with respect to the allowance of the above claim rests.. However, it is apparent that the claim was bona fide and was not false as at the time when the return was filed there was difference of judicial opinion as to allowability of the provision for NPA on the basis of RBI Guidelines. The related to allowance of the was resolved only after the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal was rendered in the case of New India Industries Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2007] 112 TTJ (Delhi) 917. This decision was rendered on 26-10-2007. Prior to this there was a divergence of opinion expressed by the various orders of coordinate benches?
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 9 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1