Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (1.21 seconds)Section 14A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 115JB in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 145A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
C.I.T. -5 vs M/S Avani Exports on 30 March, 2015
Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
Avani Exports (supra) and the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this
Tribunal in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2003-04 (supra), to which
both of us are party, we hold that the impugned order of the learned CIT(A)
on this issue is unsustainable and reverse the same. Accordingly, we hold
this issue in favour of the assessee and consequently allow ground No. VII
of assessee's appeal.
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pune vs Shirke Construction Equipment Ltd on 17 May, 2007
In our view, this issue is settled by judicial pronouncements cited
above by the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACG
Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), of the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court in the case of Shri Ram Honda Power Equipment (supra) and of the
ITAT - Delhi (Special Bench) in the case of Lalson Enterprises (2004) 89
IGD 25 (Del SB). Respectfully following these decisions (supra), we uphold
the decision of the learned CIT(A) in directing the AO to deduct only 90% of
the net income after adjustment of expenses, if any, from the business
profits while computing the eligible deduction under section 80HHC of the
Act. Consequently, Revenue's ground No. 3 is dismissed.
J.K. Industries Ltd. vs Acit on 8 November, 2005
8.2 After hearing both parties in the matter, we hold this issue against
the assessee, and uphold the orders of the authorities below following,
inter alia, the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs.
Shirke Construction Equipment Ltd. (2007) 291 ITR 380 (SC) and of the
Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of J.K. Industries vs. ACIT
(2013) 351 ITR 434 (Kar). Consequently, ground No. V of the assessee's
appeal is dismissed.
Lalsons Enterprises vs Dcit on 25 February, 2004
(ii) Lalsons Enterprises vs. DCIT (2004) 89 itd 25 (Del.
Acg Associated Capsules P.Ltd vs C.I.T Central-Iv Mumbai on 8 February, 2012
In our view, this issue is settled by judicial pronouncements cited
above by the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of ACG
Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (supra), of the Hon'ble Delhi High
Court in the case of Shri Ram Honda Power Equipment (supra) and of the
ITAT - Delhi (Special Bench) in the case of Lalson Enterprises (2004) 89
IGD 25 (Del SB). Respectfully following these decisions (supra), we uphold
the decision of the learned CIT(A) in directing the AO to deduct only 90% of
the net income after adjustment of expenses, if any, from the business
profits while computing the eligible deduction under section 80HHC of the
Act. Consequently, Revenue's ground No. 3 is dismissed.