Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.35 seconds)
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Sree Bhagavathi Textiles Ltd. on 29 October, 1993 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Kerala Agro Industries Corporation on 4 December, 1989

9. The order of the Tribunal reveals that the specific aspect as to whether the bonus paid by the assessee may stand the test specified in Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act read along with the proviso has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, we decline to answer the question. We direct the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decisions in CIT v. Kerala Agro Industries Corporation [1990] 183 ITR 197 (Ker), CIT v. P. Alikunju, M.A. Nazir, Cashew Industries [1987] 166 ITR 611 (Ker) and Income-tax Reference No. 185 of 1985 (CIT v. P. Bala-krishna Piliai, International Cashew Traders [1990] 182 ITR 449) and Income-tax Reference No. 399 of 1985 (CIT v. Kumar Industries [1990] 183 ITR 156 (Ker)).
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 12 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Kumar Industries on 28 July, 1989

9. The order of the Tribunal reveals that the specific aspect as to whether the bonus paid by the assessee may stand the test specified in Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act read along with the proviso has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, we decline to answer the question. We direct the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decisions in CIT v. Kerala Agro Industries Corporation [1990] 183 ITR 197 (Ker), CIT v. P. Alikunju, M.A. Nazir, Cashew Industries [1987] 166 ITR 611 (Ker) and Income-tax Reference No. 185 of 1985 (CIT v. P. Bala-krishna Piliai, International Cashew Traders [1990] 182 ITR 449) and Income-tax Reference No. 399 of 1985 (CIT v. Kumar Industries [1990] 183 ITR 156 (Ker)).
Kerala High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 13 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs P. Balakrishna Pillai, International ... on 21 June, 1989

9. The order of the Tribunal reveals that the specific aspect as to whether the bonus paid by the assessee may stand the test specified in Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act read along with the proviso has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, we decline to answer the question. We direct the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decisions in CIT v. Kerala Agro Industries Corporation [1990] 183 ITR 197 (Ker), CIT v. P. Alikunju, M.A. Nazir, Cashew Industries [1987] 166 ITR 611 (Ker) and Income-tax Reference No. 185 of 1985 (CIT v. P. Bala-krishna Piliai, International Cashew Traders [1990] 182 ITR 449) and Income-tax Reference No. 399 of 1985 (CIT v. Kumar Industries [1990] 183 ITR 156 (Ker)).
Kerala High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 11 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs P. Alikunju, M.A. Nazir, Cashew ... on 11 February, 1987

9. The order of the Tribunal reveals that the specific aspect as to whether the bonus paid by the assessee may stand the test specified in Section 36(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act read along with the proviso has not been adjudicated by the Tribunal. In these circumstances, we decline to answer the question. We direct the Tribunal to consider the matter afresh in the light of the decisions in CIT v. Kerala Agro Industries Corporation [1990] 183 ITR 197 (Ker), CIT v. P. Alikunju, M.A. Nazir, Cashew Industries [1987] 166 ITR 611 (Ker) and Income-tax Reference No. 185 of 1985 (CIT v. P. Bala-krishna Piliai, International Cashew Traders [1990] 182 ITR 449) and Income-tax Reference No. 399 of 1985 (CIT v. Kumar Industries [1990] 183 ITR 156 (Ker)).
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 29 - T K Thommen - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs Mahalakshmi Textile Mills Ltd. on 12 March, 1964

4. We shall consider first question No. 1. It is clear from the statement of facts and from the order of the Tribunal that the expenditure incurred by the assessee was on renovating and replacing the old and worn out parts of the machinery. The Tribunal found that the need for modernisation of the machinery was imperative for the business to run smoothly and effectively. As we said earlier, the Tribunal relied on its own decision in the case of Madras Spinners Ltd. Madras Spinners' case is the subject-matter of Income-tax Reference No. 168 of 1986.
Madras High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 260 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Madras Spinners Ltd. on 9 January, 1989

(CIT v. Madras Spinners Ltd. [1994] 207 ITR 35). In this income-tax reference, at the instance of the Revenue, the questions referred are almost identical. We heard the case along with a batch of cases relating to Vanaja Textiles and Madras Spinners Ltd. In the batch of cases, the assessment relating to Vanaja Textiles, we have considered in a little depth the question involved in this case also and found that the expenditure incurred in those cases for carrying on the business in the line of modern trends is not an expenditure in the nature of capital expenditure, but only revenue expenditure. We do not want to repeat what we have said in the income-tax references relating to the assessment of Vanaja Textiles.
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 3 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document
1