Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.79 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Associate Techno Plastics P. Ltd. on 21 November, 2013

Tulip Star Hotels Ltd., New Delhi vs Department Of Income Tax on 14 October, 2015

In support of his claim, the ld AR placed reliance on the judicial pronouncements in the cases of Prabhavati Shah Vs. CIT (1998) 231 ITR 1 (Bom), CIT Vs. Kamlaben Sureshchandra Bhatti (2014) 367 ITR 692(Guj), Electra Jaipur P Ltd Vs. Inspecting ACIT (1988) 26 ITD 236(Del), CIT Vs. Jagjot Singh(2014)41taxman.com423(All), CIT Vs Unique Plastics P Ltd (2015) 60 Taxman.com ( AP& T), Jer Kersi Contractor V ITO Mum Trib ITA No. 1892/Mum/2009.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax Del vs M/S Bharat Hotels Ltd. on 6 September, 2018

5. In this Court‟s opinion the ITAT‟s findings cannot be faulted given that almost 19% of the investments of one lender and over 30% of the business activities of the other lending company, fell within the expression mentioned in proviso (i) to Section 2(22)(e) of the Act. The test of substantiality, in our opinion, is not confined to what the RBI declares it to be, generally. There can be NDFC and NBFC - i.e. an entity ITA 271/2005 Page 3 of 8 which may carry out more than one financial non-banking activity. In the present case too these companies carry on more than one non-banking financial activity - up to 3 or 4. In such event, the 50% test to benchmark whether the amounts fall within or outside the 2 nd proviso to Section 2(22)(e) of the Act would fail. This Court notices that this view is reflected in the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Parle Plastics Ltd., 332 ITR 63 (Bom).
Delhi High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - S R Bhat - Full Document
1