Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 37 (0.36 seconds)
Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Eicher Goodearth. (Eicher Goodearth V. ... on 26 April, 1999
cites
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 209 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax. ... on 29 January, 1998
Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal, Special Bench in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd., (supra) we hold that the CIT(A) was not justified in directing the AO to remit the interest charged under s. 234B. The order of the CIT(A) in relation to ground No. 3 is set aside and the action of the AO of charging interest under s. 234B in a case where the total income has been computed under the provisions of s. 115J of IT Act is upheld. Hence, ground No. 3 of Revenue's appeal is also allowed.
Section 31 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 30 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madurai vs M/S, T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd on 11 September, 1996
However, the said judgment was delivered by a Bench comprising of two Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court, the judgment in the case of CIT vs. T. V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons (supra) was rendered by Hon'ble 3 Judges on the Supreme Court. In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under :
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Appollo Tyres Ltd. on 19 August, 1998
6.40. The learned senior Departmental Representative had placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (supra). In that case, the assessee had shown net profits per P&L a/c at Rs. 60,91,306. While arriving at the net profit, the assessee made a deduction of Rs. 13,66,39,051 by way of arrears of depreciation. The deduction of Rs. 39,66,39.051 representing the arrears of depreciation, according to the assessing authority, was not in accordance with the provisions of Part II and Part 111 of the Sch. VI of the Companies Act. The Hon'ble High Court referred to in Accounting Standard AS-6 in paras 14 and 15 at p. 562. The Hon'ble High Court observed as under
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Calcutta vs Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd on 4 February, 1999
In the latest judgment in the case of CIT vs. Sugauli Sugar Works, (P) Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the mere fact that the assessee has made an entry of transfer in his accounts unilaterally will not enable the Department to say that s. 41(1) would apply and the amount should be included in the total income of the assessee. This judgment supports the assessee's contention.