Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (2.67 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Jonas Woodhead & Sons Ltd., Madras vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras on 11 February, 1997

C.I.T.,Delhi vs Bharti Hexacom Ltd. on 16 October, 2023

iii. Having referred to the aforesaid decisions, three other judgments were noticed by the Delhi High Court which, according to learned ASG appearing for the appellant-Revenue were wrongly applied to the case at hand. The said judgments are, Jonas Woodhead and Sons Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1997) 224 ITR 342 (“Jonas Woodhead and Sons”), Southern Switch Gear Ltd. vs. CIT, (1998) 232 ITR 359 (“Southern Switch Gear Ltd.”); CIT, 11 Madras vs. Best and Co. (Pvt.) Ltd., (1966) 60 ITR 11 (“Best and Co.”).
Supreme Court of India Cites 52 - Cited by 5 - B V Nagarathna - Full Document

Acit, Circle-9(1), New Delhi vs Fcc Clutch India P.Ltd, Gurgaon on 30 July, 2021

In the case of Jonas Woodhead v CIT ( 224 ITR 342) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held Tribunal having considered the different clauses of the agreement and having come to the conclusion that under the agreement with the foreign firm what 12 was set up by the assessee was a new business and the foreign firm had not only furnished information and the technical know- how but rendered valuable services in setting up of the factory and even after the expiry of the agreement there was no embargo on the assessee to continue to manufacture the product in question, it was difficult to hold that the entire payment made was a revenue expenditure merely because the payment was required to be made on a certain percentage of the gross turnover of the products as royalty. In the facts and circumstances of the case, High Court was fully justified in answering the reference in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Additional Commissioner Of ... vs Glad Investments (P.) Ltd. on 9 June, 2006

26. The learned CIT, DR has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of T. V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. (supra) also and argued that for the purpose of attracting liability to tax on capital gains it was not necessary that the assessee should have actually received the profits and it was sufficient that the assessee had a right to receive the profit. There is no doubt as to the general proposition that provisions of Section 45 relating to capital gains come into operation on accrual basis and not on actual receipt basis. Accrual, as rightly stated by the learned CIT, DR pre-supposes right to receive. The learned CIT, DR has, therefore, referred to Clause 6 of the agreement between the assessee and the credit institutions and argued that the assessee had a right to receive the profit from the sale of shares if there was any balance left after appropriation of the debt by the credit institutions. The learned CIT, DR has, however, not noticed that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the assessee did not receive a single paisa because the entire sale proceeds were consumed in appropriation of the debt owed by Pertech and Swati and there was no balance left. Thus, on the facts and circumstances of the case the assessee neither received nor had any right to receive any part of the sale proceeds of the shares in question.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 60 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Gujarat State Road Transport Corpn. ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 18 February, 1998

In Jonas Woodhead & Sons Ltd. Vs. CIT, 224 ITR 342 (SC); the Income-tax Officer disallowed 1/4th of the Royalty claimed by the assessee company as revenue expenditure. The Royalty was in terms of the collaboration agreement between the assessee & foreign company. It was a composite payment for supply of technical know-how and services for setting up plant and manufacture of products. There was no embargo on manufacture even after the expiry of agreement. The High Court confirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer stating that the assessee acquired a benefit of enduring nature and any sum paid towards it would ITA No2159/Ahd/2006 A.Y. 2003-04 .
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 49 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Dy Cit Cc 38, vs Department Of Income Tax on 9 April, 2012

13.2. We have considered the issue and rival submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee and learned DR. Since the assessee has raised this issue as additional ground before the learned CIT(A), this is not an additional ground before us and therefore, it has to be considered on its merits. The assessee relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of RamgopalGanpatrai& Sons Ltd. vs. CIT 24 ITR 362 (Bom.).It was submitted that the relevant releif under Sec.90 of IT Act ought to be granted in respect of income taxed in Belgium which was also included in the total income in the impugned assessment year. In support of the same, a copy of the note filed by Belgium Accountant for payment of tax in Belgium, a copy of the assessment note received from Overseas Control Department, Antwerp and proof of payment of tax were filed, in addition to written submissions filed before the CIT(A). Since the amounts were already included in the assessee's income and stated in the computation of income, this issue has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and necessary relief has to be granted as per the provisions of the Act. For this purpose, we remit the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for detailed examination of the contentions and take necessary decision while giving credit to the amount of tax paid in Belgium as per law. With this direction, the ground is considered as allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 43 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next