Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.24 seconds)
M/S. S R Batliboi & Company Llp, Kolkata vs Dcit, Circle - 22, Kolkata, Kolkata on 26 October, 2021
cites
Chambal Fertilisers And Chemicals Ltd vs Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 July, 2019
30. The Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench) in Income-tax Appeal No.
52/2018 decided on 31st July, 2018 Chambal Fertilisers and Chemicals Ltd. v. CIT, by
reference to the aforesaid CBDT Circular dated 18th May, 1967 has held that the ITAT erred in
holding that the "education cess" is a disallowable expenditure under section 40(a)(ii) of the IT
Act. Ms. Linhares was unable to state whether the Revenue has appealed this decision. Mr.
Ramani, learned Senior Advocate submitted that his research did not suggest that any appeal
was instituted by the Revenue against this decision, which is directly on the point and favours
the Assessee.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Gurupada Dutta And Ors. on 10 June, 1943
29. In Kanga and Palkhivala's "The Law and Practice of Income Tax" (Tenth Edition), several
decisions have been analyzed in the context of provisions of Section 40(a)(ii) of the IT Act,
1961. There is reference to the decision of Privy Council in CIT v. Gurupada Dutta [1946] 14
ITR 100 (PC), where a union rate was imposed under a Village Self Government Act upon the
3
ITA No. 2589/Kol/2019
M/s. S. R. Batliboi & Company LLP, AY 2016-17
assessee as the owner or occupier of business premises, and the quantum of the rate was fixed
after consideration of the 'circumstances' of the assessee, including his business income. The
Privy Council held that the rate was not 'assessed on the basis of profits' and was allowable as
a business expense.
Jaipuria Samla Amalgamated Collieries ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, West Bengal on 31 August, 1971
Following this decision, the Supreme Court held in Jaipuria Samla
Amalgamated Collieries Ltd. v. CIT 1971 [82 ITR 580] that the expression 'profits or gains of
any business or profession' has reference only to profits and gains as determined in accordance
with Section 29 of this Act and that any rate or tax levied upon profits calculated in a manner
other than that provided by that section could not be disallowed under this sub-clause.
Similarly, this sub-clause is inapplicable, and a deduction should be allowed, where a tax is
imposed by a district board on business with reference to 'estimated income' or by a
municipality with reference to 'gross income'. Besides, unlike Section 10(4) of the 1922 Act, this
sub-clause does not refer to 'cess' and therefore, a 'cess' even if levied upon or calculated on the
basis of business profits may be allowed in computing such profits under this Act.
Union Of India vs M/S Exide Industries Ltd. on 24 April, 2020
9. Therefore, in the light of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Exide Industries
Ltd. (supra), we are inclined to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss this ground
of appeal of the assessee.
Section 29 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Income Tax Rules, 1962
THE FINANCE ACT, 2021
Ntpc Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax-V on 16 April, 2014
According to Ld. AR, the chargeability of tax is
2
ITA No. 2589/Kol/2019
M/s. S. R. Batliboi & Company LLP, AY 2016-17
a legal issue and it can be raised for the first time even before this Tribunal as held by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Vs. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC). Therefore, he
prayed that this additional ground of appeal may be admitted and adjudicated.
1