Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.39 seconds)Section 10A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 115JB in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
C.I.T & Anr vs M/S Yokogawa India Ltd on 16 December, 2016
013. Now we come to the appeal of the assessee. Ground
number 1 is against the order of the learned CIT - A in
setting of the loss of one eligible unit against the profit of
the other eligible unit. The learned Authorized
Representative submitted that this issue is squarely
covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in assessee‟s own case in case of
CIT v. Yokogawa India Ltd. [2017] 77 taxmann.com 41,
391 ITR 274.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. on 16 March, 2001
12. Considering the facts of the case in the light of
the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case
of Shambu Investment (supra), we do not find any
reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A).
Ground No. 1,2 & 3 are accordingly dismissed."
M/S. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., New ... vs Acit, New Delhi on 16 June, 2017
(f) where the amount of expenditure in relation to any
exempt income other than specified income is required to
be added to the book profit. Therefore, there is a
separate mechanism provided for adjustment to the book
profit of this kind of expenditure. Identical issue has been
decided by Special bench in case of ACIT vs. Vireet
Investment Pvt. Ltd. 58 ITR (T) 313. Therefore, we hold
that the lower authorities are not correct in adding
notional expenditure as computed u/s 14 A of the Act of
₹3, 82,733/- and increasing the book profit by that sum
under Section 115JB of the Act. In the result, ground no.
9 and 10 are allowed.
1