Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)
Dcit, Sriganganagar vs Shri Devki Nandan Golyan, Jaipur on 12 January, 2017 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Bhawan Va Path Nirman (Bohra) And Co. ... on 18 April, 2002

9. The Ld. CIT(A) in his order on record observed that decision relied on by the AO in Ram Jhanwar Lal(supra) and Mohta Construction Co. (supra) are not applicable to the facts of the present case as in those cases issue of interest to third parties was not specifically considered. The Ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that after applying a particular NP rate, depreciation & interest requires to be deducted separately.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 12 - Cited by 28 - Full Document

Income Tax Officer vs Khosla Construction Co. on 8 December, 2000

Similar decision existed in the cases of ITO Vs. Khosla Construction Company (75 TTJ 515); CIT Vs. Amritlal Khatri (123 Taxmann 475); Chopra Brothers(I) Limited Vs. ITO (202 ITR 40). The Ld. CIT(A) further held that the claim of interest to third parties have been allowed to the assessee in past. There are no new facts brought on record to prompt any diversion from this stand. Furthermore, in the A.Y. 2009-10, the issue of allowance of deduction of interest to third parties was decided in favour of the assessee by Predecessor of the Ld. CIT(A) and this order was confirmed by the Hon'ble ITAT after finding no infirmity in it therefore respectfully following the above decision the Ld. CIT(A) directed AO to allow deduction of interest payment to third parties after applying the NP rate of 9.99%. The assessee got relief on this account.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar Cites 12 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay vs M/S. Amritlal Bhogilal & Co on 28 April, 1958

Similar decision existed in the cases of ITO Vs. Khosla Construction Company (75 TTJ 515); CIT Vs. Amritlal Khatri (123 Taxmann 475); Chopra Brothers(I) Limited Vs. ITO (202 ITR 40). The Ld. CIT(A) further held that the claim of interest to third parties have been allowed to the assessee in past. There are no new facts brought on record to prompt any diversion from this stand. Furthermore, in the A.Y. 2009-10, the issue of allowance of deduction of interest to third parties was decided in favour of the assessee by Predecessor of the Ld. CIT(A) and this order was confirmed by the Hon'ble ITAT after finding no infirmity in it therefore respectfully following the above decision the Ld. CIT(A) directed AO to allow deduction of interest payment to third parties after applying the NP rate of 9.99%. The assessee got relief on this account.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 221 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

R.I. Chadha And Ors. vs Income-Tax Officer on 12 May, 1987

Similar decision existed in the cases of ITO Vs. Khosla Construction Company (75 TTJ 515); CIT Vs. Amritlal Khatri (123 Taxmann 475); Chopra Brothers(I) Limited Vs. ITO (202 ITR 40). The Ld. CIT(A) further held that the claim of interest to third parties have been allowed to the assessee in past. There are no new facts brought on record to prompt any diversion from this stand. Furthermore, in the A.Y. 2009-10, the issue of allowance of deduction of interest to third parties was decided in favour of the assessee by Predecessor of the Ld. CIT(A) and this order was confirmed by the Hon'ble ITAT after finding no infirmity in it therefore respectfully following the above decision the Ld. CIT(A) directed AO to allow deduction of interest payment to third parties after applying the NP rate of 9.99%. The assessee got relief on this account.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1