Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.32 seconds)Section 14 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Swami Enterprises Pvt. Ltd on 10 November, 2010
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Ahmedabad vs Sarabhai Holdings Pvt. Ltd on 21 October, 2008
26. The judgment of the Division Bench in
Lok Housings [2009] 308 ITR 356 (Bom) is based on
the peculiar facts and circumstances as they emerged
before the court in that case. The decision would
indicate that the investments made by the assessee
were not a mere investment of its surplus funds. The
investments made were regarded by the Division
Bench as those which resulted in earning income
from the running business of the assessee. The
interest was utilized for the purpose of business and it
was in these circumstances that the Division Bench
must be construed to have found the existence of a
direct and proximate nexus between the income that
was earned and the business activity of the assessee.
So construed, the judgment of the Division Bench is
confined to the facts as they emerged before the court
in that case. The judgment of the Division Bench in
Lok Holdings [2009] 308 ITR 356 (Bom) cannot be
held to lay down a broad proposition of law that an
investment of surplus funds by an assessee who
carries on business must necessarily be construed to
result in the generation of business income by way of
interest received on investment."
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Indo Swiss Jewels Ltd. And Anr. on 5 September, 2005
In support
of this submission, he relied upon the judgment in CIT v. Indo Swiss
Jewels Ltd., and in particular paragraph 6 thereof, which we have
extracted above.
Section 56 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Poona vs Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. on 26 March, 1973
14. Mr. Pardiwalla's reliance upon the judgment of this Court in
CIT v. Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd. (1982) 137 ITR 42 is not well
founded. It is important to note that the Court found that the assessee
had accumulated large funds to finance the entire cost of a plant which,
in fact, was commissioned in the subsequent years. The same was a
SRP 10/24
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:08:36 :::
ITR63.96
normal feature of the assessee's business. The accumulated amounts
were kept in fixed deposits in order to earn interest to raise the profit of
the assessee until the funds accumulated could be used for the
assessee's business as contemplated. The authorities accepted these
findings but despite the same, upheld the deduction made by the ITO.