Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.26 seconds)Section 44AA in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 133A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 145 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai vs M/S Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd on 27 February, 2008
37. TheHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of 'CIT vs. Bilahari
Investment P. Ltd.'(Supra), held that: "Every assessee is entitled
to arrange its affairs and follow the method of accounting, which
the Department has earlier accepted. It is only in those cases
where the Department records a finding that the method adopted
by the assessee results in distortion of profits that the Department
can insist on substitution of the existing method."
Section 69B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Calcutta vs British Paints India Ltd on 13 December, 1990
21. The counsel has emphasized here that the valuation of stock
is very important factor for determination of correct profit of the
assessee and the Supreme Court of India long back in the case of
CIT v. British Paints India Limited 188 ITR 44 opined that the
importance of the stock valuation is to find out the correct
50
ITA No. 408 and 409/AGR/2015
ITA No. 437 and 438/AGR/2015
Assessment Year: 2010-11
determination of the profits or loss of the business
enterprise. Therefore, the valuation of the stock since was based
on erroneous method of valuation is neither justified nor lawful, so
to be quashed.
Steel Ingots Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Ors. on 28 March, 2006
1. The M.P. High court in the case of Steel Ingots (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 86
Taxman 440 (M.P.) held
"That the eventual destination of every litigation is justice and as such
technicality should not be permitted to prevail as a speed - breaker in the course of
dispensation of justice. True it is that the question was not raised before the first
appellate authority but it is equally true that the aforesaid question was one of law
and had material bearing on the order of assessment and, therefore, the Tribunal
should have permitted to the assessee to raise the aforesaid question despite the
fact that it failed to raise the same before the first appellate authority."
Section 263 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax Etc. Etc. vs Shri Ram Honda Power Equip Etc. Etc. on 12 January, 2007
(c) In the course of last hearing just by way of illustration, the
assessee has furnished before you and demonstrated that the
tempering is prima facie evident. The assessee is enclosing herewith
the copy of Allahabad High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Shri
Ram Pher dated 01.10.2010 in Income Tax appeal No. 218/2005. In the
said decision, it has been held that if there are allegations of
interpolation then it was incumbent the appellant authority to
consider each & every item with regard to which the assessee raised
objections. The principles laid down in this decision are fully applicable
in the case of assessee. In para (4)(ii) of SPB internal page 6 & 7, the
assesses has cited few apparent interpolations and submitted that by
these alone few tempering examples, value has been enhanced
injudiciously by Rs. 19, 82434/-.