Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 25 (0.35 seconds)
M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously ... vs The Ito, Corporate Ward1(1),, Kochi on 14 May, 2025 cites

Brooke Bond India Limited vs Commissioner Of Income Tax,West ... on 27 February, 1997

22. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Undisputedly, the expenditure was incurred by the appellant on a proposed rights issue expenditure, which was abandoned for the reasons best known to the appellant-company. The expenditure was not incurred during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Thus, the condition precedent for allowance of deduction as revenue expenditure u/s.37(1) of the Act, does not stand settled and there was no material on record to show that even the proposed rights issue was abandoned during the previous year relevant to the assessment under consideration. Moreover, any expenditure incurred on the expansion of capital base of the appellant-company is nothing but a capital expenditure as allowed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Brook Bond India Limited v. CIT and CIT v. Kodak India Limited, cited supra. Thus, we do not find any infirmity either in law or in facts in the orders of the authorities below. This grounds of appeal is dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 288 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd.,, ... vs The Addl. Cit, Range-1,, Baroda on 31 January, 2023

of belated remittance of the employees' contribution to ESI and Labour Welfare Fund amounting to Rs.1,64,173 paid before the due date for filing the return of income. The said issue is no longer res integra, as it stood settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2022) 448 ITR 518 (SC). Since the decision of the learned CIT(A) is in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court, we do not find any merit in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. Accordingly, this grounds of appeal stand dismissed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 19 - Cited by 323 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Kodak India Ltd. on 17 October, 2001

22. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Undisputedly, the expenditure was incurred by the appellant on a proposed rights issue expenditure, which was abandoned for the reasons best known to the appellant-company. The expenditure was not incurred during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Thus, the condition precedent for allowance of deduction as revenue expenditure u/s.37(1) of the Act, does not stand settled and there was no material on record to show that even the proposed rights issue was abandoned during the previous year relevant to the assessment under consideration. Moreover, any expenditure incurred on the expansion of capital base of the appellant-company is nothing but a capital expenditure as allowed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Brook Bond India Limited v. CIT and CIT v. Kodak India Limited, cited supra. Thus, we do not find any infirmity either in law or in facts in the orders of the authorities below. This grounds of appeal is dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 17 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next