Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 53 (0.70 seconds)Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 145 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Burmah Shell Oil Storage & Distributing ... vs C.I.T on 6 April, 1994
58. As regards question No. 2 the ITAT concurred with the CIT (Appeals) and held against the Revenue. The finding of the CIT (Appeals) on this point was that the Fund Flow Statement produced by the assessed showed that out of the total loans obtained by issue of Euro Bonds, a substantial portion was used for Capital Assets and the remaining towards Working Capital. The CIT (A) observed 'since the assessed had utilised part of the loan for acquiring capital assets and part of the loan was used towards working capital, the additional liability on account of fluctuation rate was to be capitalised partly and was to be debited to the Profit and Loss Account partly as an allowable expenditure'. The CIT (A) followed the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Oil India Co. Ltd. v. CIT 187 ITR 156.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ibm World Trade Corporation on 20 September, 1985
and CIT v. IBM Trade Corporation 161 ITR 673 (Bom.). These decisions, with which we respectfully concur, make it clear that the question whether the assessed can claim deduction of the increased liability in the revenue account as a result of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange has to be answered in the affirmative.
Section 28 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 33 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Cit vs Eicher Motors Ltd. on 18 October, 2006
(a) In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arvind Mills followed by this Court in IFFCO and Paper Products, the question of increase in liability on capital account as a result of foreign exchange fluctuation is fully settled in favor of the assessed and against the Revenue. In that view of the matter, these appeals do not give rise to any substantial question of law and therefore ought not to be entertained. Reliance is placed on the judgments in Union of India v. Kaumudini Narayan Dalal 249 ITR 219, Paper Products, CIT v. Beekay Engineering 192 Taxation 187 (Delhi), CIT v. Sony India Ltd. 194 Taxation 344 (Delhi) and CIT v. Eicher Motors Ltd. decision dated 18.10.2006 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in ITA No. 28/2003.
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Rajeev Grinding Mills on 8 April, 2003
(b) In the case of some of the assesseds, the increase in liability has been allowed by the Department in the previous assessment years. The rule of consistency requires that this Court should not permit Revenue to keep shifting its stand or contradict the stand that it has taken in previous years. Reliance is placed upon CIT v. Rajiv Grinding Mills (Delhi) 142 Taxman 567, CWT v. RKKR International (P.)
Berger Paints India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Calcutta on 17 February, 2004
Ltd. (Delhi) 145 Taxman 322, CIT v. Neo Polypack Ltd. 245 ITR 492 (Del), Union of India v. Satish Panna Lal Shah 249 ITR 221 (SC), Berger Paints India Ltd. v. CIT 266 ITR 99 (SC).