Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.21 seconds)
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Delhi-Ii vs A.R. Chadha And Co. (India) Ltd. on 17 September, 1984 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Sree Rajendra Mills Ltd. on 19 April, 1973

3. Some other submissions made by him appear to have some greater force. Firstly, it was submitted that the approval of the Company Law Board had been applied for regarding payment of the commission, and the permission had not been granted or rejected by the time the accounts were completed; hence, the entry had to be made in the accounts, which were maintained on the mercantile system of accounting. It was submitted on instructions that later on some refund had been made in accordance with the decision of the Company Law Board and the same had been taxed in the year of refund. It was accordingly stated that the expenditure was incurred in this year as a legitimate expenditure and the amount returned later was subjected to tax in the proper year. It was pointed out that this was the situation also in the case decided by the Madras High Court in CIT v. Sree Rajendra Mills Ltd. [1974] 93 ITR 122 just referred to. The learned counsel referred to a passage at page 126 of the Report which reads as follows :
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 20 - V Ramaswami - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ramakrishna Mills (Coimbatore) Ltd. on 19 December, 1972

In this respect, two decisions of the Madras High Court in CIT v. Ramakrishna Mills (Coimbatore) Ltd. [1974] 93 ITR 49 and CIT v. Sree Rajendra Mills Ltd. [1974] 93 ITR 122 were followed. The very fact that this point had been referred to the Madras High Court in the above two cases would go to show that a question of law did arise. In opposing the reference, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted a number of points based on the fact that the question of law had already been decided by the Madras High Court and was also covered directly or indirectly by a certain Supreme Court judgment to which he referred. No doubt, these submissions have force. However, there is no direct judgment of the Supreme Court on the point and there is no judgment of this court and so these submissions are no sufficient to hold that the reference can be disallowed.
Madras High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 32 - V Ramaswami - Full Document
1