Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 49 (0.30 seconds)
Kalyani Steels Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 14 March, 1997 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs S.S.M. Ahmed Hussain on 28 January, 1986

84. He then referred to the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Blue Mountain Estates & Industries (supra) and pointed out that in a subsequent decision in the case of CIT vs. S. S. M. Ahmed (1987) 164 ITR 525 (Mad) the Madras High Court itself had distinguished the said decision and held that the case of Blue Mountain Estates & Industries was decided on specific facts. This decision is, therefore, in the opinion of the learned counsel, also distinguishable.
Madras High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 14 - Full Document

Ciba Of India Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 25 January, 1993

In CIBA of India Ltd. vs. CIT, the expenditure was directed to be treated as capital expenditure on the ground that it was incurred in bringing machinery from New York to Bombay. The machinery was gifted to the assessee resulting in receipt of a capital asset by the assessee. Therefore, it was but natural that the expenditure incurred for transportation of the asset from New York to Bombay should be treated as capital expenditure. The facts of that case are thus materially different from those of the present case.
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 19 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs R.M. Maruthai Naidu And Sons on 23 January, 1991

86. The learned counsel then brought to our notice the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. R. M. Maruthai Naidu & Sons (supra) and pointed out that this is a case of deduction under s. 36(1)(iii) of the IT Act in respect of loans for transport business which was closed, from income from cigar business was allowed. In this case, two activities, namely, cigar and transport business were considered as same business on account of the borrowed fund between the cigar and transport business. In this case, the loans of transport business were also repaid out of funds of cigar business.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Baker Mercer India P. Ltd. on 8 August, 1990

In this regard, he brought to our notice the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Baker Mercer India (P) Ltd. (supra). He argued that in the said decision, the Bombay High Court has held that when an assessee had acquired an asset from a country outside India for the purpose of his business and in consequence of the change in the rate of exchange at any time after acquisition of such asset, there is an increase in the liability of the assessee as expressed in Indian currency for making payment towards cost of the asset or for repayment of the whole or a part of the money borrowed by him in any foreign currency specifically for the purpose of acquiring the asset, the amount by which the liability is so increased shall be added to the actual cost of the asset for the various purposes which are set out in s. 43A of the Act and the increased cost shall be the cost of acquisition of the asset. He, therefore, submitted that the deduction of 1/6th amount of exchange fluctuation is admissible to the assessee.
Bombay High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 23 - S V Manohar - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat Ii vs Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. on 21 November, 1975

110. The learned senior Departmental Representative also raised the issue of different location of the factory of tube division. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Addl. CIT vs. Aniline Dyestuff & Pharmaceuticals (P) Ltd. (1982) 138 ITR 843 (Bom) and the Gujarat High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd. (supra), wherein the locations of the two units were also different.
Gujarat High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 97 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 Next