Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 45 (0.05 seconds)Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in Sai University Act, 2018 [Entire Act]
Section 43B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Jodhpur Co-Operative Marketing ... on 21 April, 2004
Hon'ble
Tribunal distinguished the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT
Vs. Jodhpur Co-operative Marketing Society 275 ITR 372 (Raj) stating that in that
case the amount was set apart for the shareholders of the society whereas in the
present case amount was provided for the benefit of the employees and the
contribution made to State Renewal Fund was found allowable u/s 37(1).
Respectfully following the decision of ITAT in appellant's own case, addition made by
the AO is deleted.
M/S Madras Industrial ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Tamil ... on 4 April, 1997
The judgment relied upon by the assessee of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the matter of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT,
225 ITR 802 is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case.
However, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court in the matter of
Enterprising Enterprises (2007) 160 Taman 188 (SC) is squarely applicable to
the facts and circumstances of the case and further the said judgment is of
later date and, therefore, is required to be followed by the Bench.
Section 32 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Aditya Minerals Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad on 5 February, 1998
Hon'ble supreme Court in the matter of Aditya Mineral vs. CIT(1999) 8SSC 97
and also by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of
Enterprising Enterprises vs. DCIT in the Civil Appeal No. 5655 of 2006
whereby Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that "where the entire amount of
lease is paid either at a time or in installment, it would be capital
expenditure". Therefore, we are bound by the judgments passed by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus the expenses laid by the assessee for the
purposes of getting the mining land and leasehold land, are required to be
treated as capital expenditure. The AO is, therefore, directed to treat the
amount paid for getting the mining land and leasehold land as capital
expenditure. The AO is further directed to give all benefits as a capital
expenditure.