Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.63 seconds)Section 33 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Sassoon J. David & Co. (P) Ltd., Bombay vs C.I.T., Bombay on 3 May, 1979
The said section came up for further consideration of the Supreme Court in Sassoon J. David and Co. P. Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 261, where it was held (at page 275);
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Mico Products Pvt. Ltd. on 4 October, 1990
Question No. 5 is covered by the decision of this court in CIT v. Hico Products Pvt. Ltd. (No. 1) [1993] 201 ITR 567. Following the same, it is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
M.H. Daryani vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 5 February, 1993
Question No. 4 is covered by a decision of this court in M. H. Daryani v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 731. Following the same we answer this question also in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
Section 35B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Lubrizol India Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 11 March, 1990
3. We, therefore, first answer these three questions. Question No. 2 is covered by the decision of this court in Lubrizol India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 25. Following the same we answer it in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.