Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (3.68 seconds)
Documents citing National Newsprint And Paper Mills Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 28 April, 1977

The Arvind Mills Ltd, Ahmedabad vs Assessee on 17 April, 2013

(e) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that expenses incurred and paid in case of upfront interest was clearly allowable as per decisions of M.P.High Court in the case of national Newsprint & Paper Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (114 ITR 172), Supreme Court decision in the case of Nonsuch Tea Estate Ltd. v. CIT (98 ITR 189), Bombay High Court's decision in Calico Dyeing & Printing Works v. CIT (34 ITR 265), Gujarat High Court's decision in Granulated Fertilizers & Seeds Private Ltd. (137 ITR 400), Supreme Court's decision in the case of State of madras v. G.J. Coehlo (53 ITR 186), Madras High Court's decision in the case of CIT v. A. Krishnaswamy Mudaliar & Ors. (53 ITR 123) and Supreme Court decision in the case of Madras Ind.Investment Corpn.Ltd. (225 ITR 802).
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 38 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nirlon Synthetic Fibres And Chemicals ... vs Inspecting Assistant Commissioner on 30 June, 1984

In this connection, the decision in National Newsprint & Paper Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1961] 41 ITR 60 (MP) is very instructive. The Madhya Pradesh High Court in that case was construing the provisions of Sections 18(3B) and 43 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ('the 1922 Act') which correspond to Sections 195 and 163 of the 1961 Act. The High Court observed the expression 'unless he is himself liable to pay any income-tax . . . thereon as an agent' introduces in Sub-section (3B) an exception for the benefit of the person sought to be made liable for deduction under that sub-section. The expression does not mean that unless the person has been declared not to be an agent in accordance with Section 43, he cannot be made liable for deduction under Sub-section (3B). If the department has not treated him as an agent, it must be taken that for the purpose of Sub-section (3B) of Section 18, the person has not been made liable to pay income-tax as an agent of the non-resident. No enquiry and adjudication is necessary for determining whether a person has or Has not been treated as an agent under Section 43 before making him liable under Section 18(3B) for deduction of tax. The above principle would apply in the present case. As already stated, the assessee has not been treated as an agent. The assessee itself had never claimed to be an agent before the ITO. In the circumstances, the assessee cannot claim that the assessee is liable to pay income-tax as an agent and that provisions of Section 195 were not applicable.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

National Handloom Development ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 11 December, 2003

[1979] 119 ITR 537 (Patna); National Newsprint and Paper Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 172 (MP); CIT v. Roberts McLean and Co. Ltd. [1978] 111 ITR 489 (Cal); CIT v. Swadeshi Cotton and Flour Mills Pvt. Ltd. [1964] 53 ITR 134 (SC); Seth Champalal Ramswarup v. CIT [1964] 52 ITR 201 (All) ; Pankaja Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 665 (Mad) ; CIT v. Shewbux Jahurilal [1962] 46 ITR 688 (Cal); CIT v. Mathulal Baldeo Prasad [1961] 42 ITR 517 (All) and Kanpur Tannery Ltd. v. CIT [1958] 34 ITR 863 (All).
Allahabad High Court Cites 37 - Cited by 5 - M Katju - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Teesta Valley Co. Ltd. on 8 August, 1989

In National Newsprint and Paper Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 172, the Madhya Pradesh High Court was considering the assessee's claim for deduction of arrear interest payable by it to the Government in respect of the accounting years 1949-50 to 1956-57. The deduction was claimed in the financial year 1956-57. The Government had granted in 1949-50 substantial loans to the assessee-company without specifying any rate of interest. In 1952, the Government intimated to the assessee-company that interest on such loans would be charged at certain rates. Correspondence followed between the company and the Government as the assessee pressed the Government for waiver of interest or, in the alternative, to reduce the rate to a minimum. Finally, by an agreement arrived at in 1957, the interest was not waived but the amount was converted into equity shares. The assessee-company maintained its accounts on the mercantile system but it claimed the entire interest for the years 1949-50 to 1956-57 as a deductible business expenditure in the financial year 1956-57. This claim was upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
Calcutta High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Lachhman Das Mathura Das on 28 January, 1980

The Madhya Pradesh High Court had occasion to consider the accrual of liability for damages in cases where there was a waiver clause in the case of National Newsprint and Paper Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 172 (MP) and with respect rightly held that the liability in such cases would not crystallize till the waiver matter was disposed of. We are, therefore, of the view that the liability for Rs. 69,383 did not crystallize in the accounting period relevant to the assessment year in question. This disposes of the third question.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 15 - Full Document
1   2 Next