Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (4.41 seconds)

Lakhanpal National Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer on 9 March, 1999

43.2 The next decision relied upon was of Delhi Tribunal in Modipon Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (1995) 53 TTJ (Del) 686 : (1995) 81 Taxman 27. In that case also, it was contended before the Tribunal by the assessee that the expenditure was in connection with consultation and drafting of petitions and appeals, and since these were matters prior to the argument of the actual appeals or the applications, the same was not hit by the provisions of s. 80VV. The Tribunal held that there was substantial merit in the submission of the assessee, and accepting the same, the disallowance was deleted in the view that the same was not hit by the provisions of s. 80VV which speaks of expenditure in connection with proceedings before an IT authority or the Tribunal or a Court.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 98 - Cited by 44 - Full Document

Eicher Motors Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 31 July, 1998

6. Accepting that there is judicial controversy on the issue, in view of grant of SLP by the Supreme Court in the case of Modipon Ltd. vs. CIT (1985) 152 ITR (St.) 192, the CIT held to keep the matter alive that the AO committed an error in enhancing the cost of assets on the basis of fluctuations in the rate of exchange causing prejudice to the interests of Revenue. Likewise, to keep the matter alive as the Revenue's SLP had been allowed by the Supreme Court, the CIT directed the AO to reconsider the matter of deduction of capital subsidy from the amount of actual cost. According to the CIT, the AO had not applied his mind in allowing depreciation on office equipments treating the same as a plant. Accordingly, he set aside the assessment order dt. 24th March, 1992, on the issues discussed above. The assessee is aggrieved and has taken four grounds of appeal relating thereto.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Indore Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 Next