Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 55 (1.30 seconds)
Documents citing Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Core Healthcare Ltd. on 25 April, 2001

Shri Rama Multi Tech Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax on 3 December, 2004

There is a reference of Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. J.K. Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. (1975) 98 ITR 153 (All) by the AO. The stand of assessee was that in its case Section 36(1), Clause (iii),is clearly applicable, because the matter is covered by the jurisdictional High Court's decision in the case of Core Healthcare Ltd. (supra). The assessee-company had an existing unit manufacturing glass at Baroda. For establishing a new glass manufacturing unit at Bangalore, the company incurred certain expenditure in the relevant year and the production of the new unit did not take place.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 65 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Lml Ltd, vs Assessee

The issue arising for adjudication is whether the expenditure under reference is, in the facts and circumstances of the case, incurred in relation to the acquisition of an asset forming part of the capital structure of the business, i.e., in its working condition for the intended user or not. A decision, thus, has to be made in each case on an appreciation of the facts of the case. The tribunal has already decided against the assessee for the 32 ITA Nos. 3 5 4 5 , 4 4 4 1 , 3 5 8 5 , 4 8 8 2 & 7 2 2 2 / M /2 0 0 2 (A . Y s.1 9 9 7 - 9 8 , 9 8 - 9 9 & 9 9 - 0 0 ) LML Limited immediately two preceding years, and against which decision the assessee is in appeal before the hon'ble high court, and which would, therefore, have a direct bearing on the instant case as well; the expenditure being on and qua the same project and purportedly of the same nature inasmuch as neither of the parties claimed differently. In fact, no different case stands made out before us. Chapter XIV-A of the Act provides for a procedure to avoid repetitive appeals. The plea in any case cannot be conditional, or made alternatively, concern as it does a rule of judicial precedence. The decision by the tribunal in the case of Core Healthcare Ltd. (supra) has found acceptance by the higher court in Dy. CIT vs. Core Healthcare Ltd. [2001] 251 ITR 61 (Guj). The said decision, inasmuch as it confirms the interest expenditure to be capital expenditure though allowable u/s.36(1)(iii), confirms the order by the tribunal in principle, inasmuch as only the revenue expenditure could be allowed u/s.37(1), which is even otherwise trite law. That is, having found validation by a higher judicial forum, the two decisions by the tribunal cannot be said to have the same precedent value. The said plea is, therefore, without merit. This answers G # 3 of the Revenue's appeals for the relevant years in the affirmative, vacating the findings by the first appellate authority deleting the impugned disallowance, save the amount of interest expenditure included therein. The assessee shall though be entitled to a claim of depreciation allowances u/s.32(1) thereon, where and to the extent otherwise exigible, which in fact represents its alternate claim.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 84 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Essar Steel Ltd. vs Deputy Cit on 30 September, 2005

In this connection, the learned counsel for the assessee referred to the following decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of (1) Tuticoiin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT (1997) 227 ITR 172 (SC); (2) Sutlej Cotton Mills (supra); and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Core Healthcare Ltd. (2001) 251 ITR 61 (Guj). It was not correct on the part of the learned JM to hold that gains were not linked to purchase of machinery or had nothing to do with liability to be discharged by the assessee relating to purchase of machinery. Findings of the learned JM were not only against facts, but even had no legal basis, the learned counsel further submitted.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 162 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Essar Steel Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 30 September, 2005

In this connection, the learned Counsel for the assessee referred to the following decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of (1) Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd. v. CIT ; (2) Suite) Cotton Mills (supra); and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Core Healthcare Ltd. . It was not correct on the part of the learned JM to hold that gains were not linked to purchase of machinery or had nothing to do with liability to be discharged by the assessee relating to purchase of machinery. Findings of the learned JM were not only against facts, but even had no legal basis, the learned Counsel further submitted.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 158 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Amtrex Appliances Ltd. on 7 November, 2003

8.7 The aforesaid principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court were followed by the Tribunal in the decisions in the cases of Core Health Care Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (supra), Bombay Housing Corporation v. Asstt. CIT (supra) and by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dy. CIT v. Core Health Care Ltd. (supra). There is no dispute about the aforesaid principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the accounting practice for ascertainment of profits adopted by a company cannot override the specific provisions contained in the IT Act relating to taxability of any income or relating to grant of deduction. These principles can be applied only in cases where there is a conflict between accounting practice adopted by the assessee and a clear and specific provisions relating to grant of deductions contained in the IT Act. The assessee treated the expenditure of Rs. 24,82,133 and Rs. 10,00,053 as deferred revenue expenditure and has written off the said amount as expenditure over a period of five years. Such a decision of the company has been approved by the board of directors as well as by the shareholders in their annual general meeting. Such a decision of treating the said expenditure as deferred revenue expenditure and spreading the same over a period of five years, has also been approved by the auditors. They have not qualified their audit report in relation to such treatment given by the assessee in their books of account. There is no specific provision relating to year of allowability of deferred revenue expenditure.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 39 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Biols Ltd.,, ... vs Assessee on 28 March, 2003

19. We find that this issue of pre-operative expenses on account of interest and other expenses is fully covered by the Hon'ble apex court's judgment and also in assessee's own case by Tribunal's order in assessee's earlier years cited (supra) As the issue is covered by the Hon'ble Apex Court's decision in the case of Core Health Care Ltd. (supra). Respectfully following the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, we uphold the order of CIT(A) and this issue of the Revenue's appeal is dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next