Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 12 (0.20 seconds)Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Koshika Telecom Ltd. on 13 February, 2006
Similarly, in the case of CIT vs.
Koshika Telecom (supra) which has been relied upon by the
predecessor CIT(A) to decide the appeal in favour of the assessee
in A.Y. 2010-11 has the same ratio. Accordingly, we respectfully
following the decisions as discussed hereinabove direct the AO
to treat the interest and the various deposits as stated
hereinabove as income from business and not from income from
other sources. Accordingly, the assessee is entitled to deduction
under section 80IB. The AO is directed accordingly.
Section 80HH in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. And Anr. on 5 September, 2005
In the case of CIT
vs. Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. (supra) the interest earned on short
term deposits kept apart for the purpose of business has to be
treated as income earned from business and can not be treated
as income from other sources.
Pandian Chemicals Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 24 April, 2003
This was reiterated in Pandian
Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT, 262 ITR 278(SC) wherein it held that "It is clear, therefore, that
the word "derived from" in Section 80HH of the income-tax Act, 1961, must be
understood as something which has direct or immediate nexus with the appellant
industrial undertaking". The Hon'ble Apex Court accordingly affirmed the order of
the Hon'ble Madras High Court holding that the interest on deposits with Tamil
Nadu Electricity Board cannot be treated as income derived by the industrial
undertaking for the purpose of Section 80HH. It is, therefore, settled law now that
4 ITA No.7464/M/2016
M/s. G.K. Founders P. Ltd.
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-Iv vs Jaypee Dsc Ventures Ltd. on 11 March, 2011
In the case of CIT vs. Jaypee Dsc Ventures Ltd.
(supra) it has been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court that
where the money is deposited into bank not as surplus money
but out of business exigencies and necessities, then the interest
acquires the character of business receipts.
Section 234B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Murli Investment Company vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 1 September, 1986
the contentions of the assessee and treated the same as income
from other sources on the ground that same is not emanating
from business activity of the assessee by relying on the decision
in the case of Murli Investment Co. vs. CIT 167 ITR 368 (Raj),
Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 191 ITR 359 (Bom) and South
India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 24
(Madras).
Section 234C in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 30 November, 2007
the contentions of the assessee and treated the same as income
from other sources on the ground that same is not emanating
from business activity of the assessee by relying on the decision
in the case of Murli Investment Co. vs. CIT 167 ITR 368 (Raj),
Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 191 ITR 359 (Bom) and South
India Shipping Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 24
(Madras).