Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.20 seconds)The Finance Act, 1996
Article 2 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 4 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
C.I.T. Gujarat vs Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd on 21 July, 1987
He further pointed out that the judgment of a Division Bench of Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. (1974) 96 ITR 672 (Guj), related to the character of the asset obtained in the hands of the purchaser and even if it is capital asset in the hands of the purchaser, it could well be revenue receipt in the hands of the seller. He submitted that the provisions of section 9 of the Income Tax Act indicate that a technical fee must be deemed to have accrued in India and hence it is liable to be taxed, if not wholly, but atleast to such part as it is attributable to the services rendered in India which had been quantified by the Commissioner (Appeals) at 20 per cent.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 5 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Aluminium Corporation Of India Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 29 August, 1972
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Aluminium Corpn. of India Ltd. v. CIT (1972) 86 ITR 11 (SC), stated that the question must be answered on the facts given by the Tribunal, which was that no service was rendered in India and the Japanese company had sold its know-how for lump sum payment. He submitted, in the circumstances, the only inference that can be drawn is that the receipt was capital in nature and outside the scope of income accruing in India.
1