Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.18 seconds)
Sri. K.R.Kaviraj, Hospet vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 26 December, 2017 cites

Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad on 5 February, 1998

In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. (239 ITR 817) the impugned payment made for acquiring mining rights is capital expenditure and cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. The reliance placed by the ld.CIT(A) on the co- ordinate bench decision of Tribunal in the case of P.Abubakar (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case M/s.Ramgad Minerals & Minings Pvt. Ltd.,(supra) is misplaced in the light of the decision of the larger bench decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd.(supra).
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 22 - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 vs M/S.B.N. Exports on 31 March, 2010

15. We heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. Premium paid for Keyman Insurance is held to be allowable by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of B.N.Exports (supra) and also by the CBDT circular No.726 dated 18/2/1998, but the same is allowable only in the year in which premium was paid. In the present case, admittedly, premium was paid in the earlier years and the question of allowing it as deduction in the subsequent year does not arise as the liability of the expenditure had not crystallized during the ITA Nos.362 to 366/2016 & CO No.2 to 6/Bang/2017 Page 9 of 9 year under consideration. Therefore, grounds of cross objections of the assessee are dismissed.
Bombay High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 41 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document
1