Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 111 (1.59 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation on 20 December, 1990

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. on 27 May, 2002

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has approved the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Chandulal Venichand (supra) and also the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Jagannath Steel Corpn. (supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly observed that the proviso to Section 43B was remedial in nature, designed to eliminate unintended consequences which may cause undue hardship to the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 47 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dy. Cit vs Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. on 27 May, 2002

The Hon'ble Supreme Court has approved the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Chandulal Venichand (supra) and also the judgment of the Hon'ble, Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Jagannath Steel Corpn. (supra). The Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly observed that the proviso to section 43B was remedial in nature, designed to eliminate unintended consequences which may cause undue hardship to the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 48 - Cited by 18 - Full Document

Sandeep R Kapoor, Vapi vs Department Of Income Tax

In taking this view, the Supreme Court has approved Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. Union of India [(1991) 189 ITR 70 (Pat), special leave petition dismissed by the Supreme Court : (1991) 191 ITR (St.) 8 (SC)], CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation [(1991) 191 ITR 676 (Cal)], and CIT v. Chandulal Venichand [(1992) 197 ITR 718, 720 (Cal)] and CIT v. Pyarilal Kasam Manji & Co. [(1992) 198 IGTR 110 (On)].
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 29 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Navnirman Infrastructure, Ahmedabad vs Assessee

In taking this view, the Supreme Court has approved Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. Union of India [(1991) 189 ITR 70 (Pat), special leave petition dismissed b the Supreme Court : (1991) 191 ITR (St.) 8 (SC)], CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation [(1991) 191 ITR 676 (Cal)], and CIT v. Chandulal Venichand [(1992) 197 ITR 718, 720 (Cal)] and CIT v. Pyarilal Kasam Manji & Co. [(1992) 198 IGTR 110 (Ori)].
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kanubhai Ramjibhai Makwana, Anand vs Assessee

In taking this view, the Supreme Court has approved ITA No.3983/Ahd/2008 A.Y. 2005-06 Sh. Kanubhai R Makwana v. ITO Wd-1 Anand Page 11 Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. Union of India [(1991) 189 ITR 70 (Pat), special leave petition dismissed b the Supreme Court : (1991) 191 ITR (St.) 8 (SC)], CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation [(1991) 191 ITR 676 (Cal)], and CIT v. Chandulal Venichand [(1992) 197 ITR 718, 720 (Cal)] and CIT v. Pyarilal Kasam Manji & Co. [(1992) 198 IGTR 110 (Ori)].
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Chandulal Venichand on 29 January, 1994

In the aforesaid decision, the court has relied upon the decision rendered by the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation [1991] 191 ITR 676, wherein the court has observed that the provisos and the Explanation added to section 43B supplied an omission and were intended to remove the impossibility of performance and, therefore, cannot be said to be prospective in operation. If an assessee has paid the sales tax, etc., on or before the due date applicable in his case for furnishing the return of income, he shall be entitled to claim deduction of that amount, whereas with regard to provident fund, family pension, paid on or before the due date. In the said case, the court has observed that if the contention raised by the Revenue is accepted, it would require the assessee to do an impossible act because the assessee could not have paid its tax liability in the previous year ending on March 31, 1984, as in March, 1984, the last quarter would end.
Gujarat High Court Cites 33 - Cited by 90 - M B Shah - Full Document

Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Paharpur Cooling Towers (P.) Ltd. on 9 November, 1992

37. In this ground, we are not concerned with the amount of Rs. 31,60,366 in respect of excise duty for which a separate ground is taken by the Revenue as ground No. 4 which we shall deal with separately. Regarding the other items, such as West Bengal sales-tax, Central sales-tax, Faridabad sales-tax and Provident Fund contribution of M. Swarup, the submissions of the learned counsel for the assesee are found to be correct from the order passed by the A.C.I.T. on 26-12-1988 at pages 62 to 64 of the assessee's compilation. There is no dispute that this issue is now concluded by the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corpn. [1991] 191 ITR 676 (Cal.). Respectfully following this decision, we confirm the order of the CIT (Appeals) and reject this ground.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 40 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Vastu Builders, Anand vs Assessee

In taking this view, the Supreme Court has approved Jamshedpur Motor Accessories Stores v. Union of India [(1991) 189 ITR 70 (Pat), special leave petition dismissed by the Supreme Court : (1991) 191 ITR (St.) 8 (SC)], CIT v. Sri Jagannath Steel Corporation [(1991) 191 ITR 676 (Cal)], and CIT v. Chandulal Venichand [(1992) 197 ITR 718, 720 (Cal)] and CIT v. Pyarilal Kasam Manji & Co. [(1992) 198 IGTR 110 (On)].
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next