Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)Section 144 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Chennai vs M/S Bilahari Investment (P) Ltd on 27 February, 2008
23. This Court too has by order dated 7th January 2015 in ITA
111/2014 (CIT v. SABH Infrastructure Ltd.) held likewise, after
Page | 8
ITA No.5676/Del/2017
Assessment Year : 2014-15
noticing the decisions of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Bilahari
Investment P. Ltd. (supra) and the order dated 15th November 2011
in ITA No. 928 of 2011 (CIT v. Manish Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.)."
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Samsung India Electronics Ltd. on 20 September, 2018
13. We do not see any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A) as the CIT(A) has
correctly appreciated the facts in the light of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble
Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs Samsung India
Electronics Ltd. vide its judgement dated 09.07.2013 and CIT vs ESPN Software
Ltd. [301 ITR 368 (Del)]. Moreover, the Revenue could not rebut the finding of
Ld.CIT(A) that brokerage forms part of selling cost therefore, allowable
expenditure. The Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.
Commissioner Of Income Tax (Ltu) vs M/S Espn Software India Ltd. on 7 November, 2017
13. We do not see any infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(A) as the CIT(A) has
correctly appreciated the facts in the light of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble
Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs Samsung India
Electronics Ltd. vide its judgement dated 09.07.2013 and CIT vs ESPN Software
Ltd. [301 ITR 368 (Del)]. Moreover, the Revenue could not rebut the finding of
Ld.CIT(A) that brokerage forms part of selling cost therefore, allowable
expenditure. The Ground No.2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed.
Section 14A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
The Companies Act, 1956
Section 37 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commnr. Of Income Tax, Delhi-Iv vs M/S. Dalmia Promoters & Devels. (P) Ltd on 16 September, 2015
The stand of the Assessee in the present case also finds
support in the decision of the Gujarat High Court in CIT-IV v.
ShivalikBuildwell (P) Ltd. (2013) 40 taxmmann.com 219 (Gujarat). It
was held that the Assessee in that case, who was a developer, was
entitled to book the amount received as booking advance as income
on transfer of the property. Till then the advance booking amounts
could not be treated as his trading receipt.