Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.21 seconds)
Sri Gajanan Agro Mills (India) Private ... vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 6 April, 2021
cites
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Large Tax ... vs M/S Reliance Industries Ltd on 2 January, 2019
to expand 8.11 existing unit then the receipt of the
subsidy would be on capital account. Reliance is also
placed on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Reliance
Industries Ltd. (2011) 339 ITR 632 (Bom)
It is the quality or the nature of the payment that is
decisive of the character of the payment and not the
method of the payment or its measure The assessee -
company relies upon the following decisions:
Dr. Reddy'S Laboratories Limited, Hyd, ... vs Acit, Circle-17(1), Hyderabad, ... on 28 April, 2017
5. LG Electronics India p Ltd vs ACIT in ITA No.
2163/Del/2015
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad vs P.J. Chemicals Ltd. Etc on 14 September, 1994
The Hon'blc Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. P.J.
Chemicals Ltd. (1994) 121 CTR (SC) 201 held as "where
Government subsidy is intended as an incentive to
encourage entrepreneurs to move to backward areas
and establish industries, it is not to meet any portion of
the 'actual cost' for the purpose of calculation of
depreciation.
Section 26 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Madras vs M/S. Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd on 16 September, 2008
The Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs.
Panni Sugars &. Chemicals Ltd (2008) 219 CTR (SC) 105
held that if the object of assistance under the subsidy
scheme is to enable the assessee to set up a new unit or
:- 7 -: ITA No. 684/Hyd/19
Sri Gaj anan Ag ro Mills (India) Pvt. Ltd .,
Nizamabad .
1