Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Sorted by: recent Court: mumbai goa Page 1 of about 90 results (0.064 seconds)

Aug 20 2015 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Chowgule and Company Ltd.

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... effect from 1/04/1999. the karnataka high court considered the object behind the amendment which read as under: clause 3 seeks to amend section 10a of the income tax act. under the existing provisions, tax holiday is available to newly established industrial undertaking set up in free trade zones and to units set up in software technology parks for five years out of ..... from five years to ten years in order to give added thrust to exports. clause-4 seeks to similarly extend the five year tax holiday period to ten years to the export oriented units under, section 10b of the income tax act. 5. relying on the aforesaid object set out in the statement of objects and reasons, karnataka high court further made following observations ..... tax appeal no.7/2008. 2. in view of the order which will be passed today ..... s. shah, c.j.) 1. both the above tax appeal no.6 of 2008 and tax appeal no.7 of 2008 under section 260-a of the income tax act, 1961 challenge the orders dated 12/07/2007 and 19/07/2007, respectively of the income tax appellate tribunal, panaji bench. the relevant assessment year is 2002-03 in tax appeal no.6/2008 and 2003-2004 in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 03 2015 (HC)

Venkatesh Sadanand Pai Vs. Kanchan A. Shenvi Kakodkar and Another

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... held that in terms of section 269ss of the income tax act, any advance by way of loan for more than rs.20,000/- has to be made by an account payee cheque only. the fact that all the ..... for the purpose of rebuttal of the said presumption. there is one more circumstance in this case which turns upon the applicability of section 269 ss of the income tax act. in the case of krishna janardan bhat vs. dattatraya g. hegde, reported in (2008)4 scc 54), the hon'ble supreme court has inter alia ..... counsel submitted that such an advance of an amount in excess of rs.20,000/- in cash, would be in breach of section 269ss of the income tax act and this itself would be sufficient to discard the evidence of the complainant. it is submitted that appellant had filed an application exhibit d74 before the learned ..... transactions are said to be in cash, which are not evidenced in any income tax returns, would be sufficient to hold that the appellant had failed to establish that the cheque was issued in discharge of any legally enforceable debt or liability. ..... ,000/- for the second time, even when the earlier amount was not repaid. he has stated that he has paid income tax till 2004 and after his retirement, he has not filed any income tax returns. it is further stated that the first respondent had not paid any interest as there was no talk about the same .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 2015 (HC)

Georgina Isidorio Mascarenhas Vs. The Goa State Election Commissioner ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... 1098 and 1108 of the portuguese civil code, 1860 and by virtue of the said provision and section 5a of the income tax act, 1961, the petitioner had an equal share in the income/profits made by her husband from his business. it was contended that the petitioner has thus, incurred disqualification from being ..... petitioner from being a member of the village panchayat of majorda-utorda-calata, salcete goa, under section 10(f) of the goa panchayat raj act, 1994 (the act of 1994, for short). 3. the brief facts are that the second respondent is a voter and is a resident of house no. 150 ..... whether there are any rules governing the procedure to be followed by the state election commissioner, while conducting an enquiry under section 10(f) of the act of 1994, it was submitted at the bar that, there are none. thus, the state election commissioner has to follow appropriate procedure having regard to ..... informed that the said sound system was hired from one henry mascarenhas. it appears that the second respondent obtained certain information under right to information act about the payments made to the persons from whom the sound system was hired for the gram sabha meetings for the past two years. in ..... the member of the panchayat under section 10(f) of the act of 1994. on behalf of the second respondent, reliance was .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

Sesa Goa Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Mumbai Goa

m.s. sanklecha, j. 1. this appeal under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 (the act) challenges the order dated 4/4/2006 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (tribunal). 2. this appeal relates to the assessment year 1996-1997 filed by the appellant-assesee. appeal filed ..... clause(baa)(1) of the explanation to section 80hhc of the act. attention was fairly invited by mr. pardivala to an unreported decision of this court in tax appeal no. 26 of 2006 in damodarmangalji mining company vs. joint commissioner of income tax rendered on 18.10.2013 in favour of the revenue while ..... construing clause (baa) of explanation to section 80 hhc of the act. however, it is submitted that it was ..... rendered per incurium as it was without considering the decision of this court in pfizer ltd. (supra). it is therefore submitted that the nature of income ..... is followed by the words of a similar nature. this test of being independent of exports has no application to specified incomes falling under section 28 of the act as it is separated by a disjunctive from the other words which have been enumerated and such words form a class which .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

M/s. V. M. Salgaoncar Sales International Vs. Assistant Commissioner o ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... taken up for final disposal. 2. this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india challenges the notice dated 28/10/2014 issued under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961 (the act). the impugned notice seeks to reopen the assessment for the assessment year 2008-2009. 3. the reasons recorded in support of the impugned notice dated 28/10/2014 for ..... and the deponent of the affidavit dated 06/05/2015 resisting the petition. 10. however, before closing we may point out that the affidavit filed by the deputy commissioner of income tax dated 06/05/2015, particularly paragraph 8 thereof, indicates that the stand of the revenue is that even if the assessee is only engaged in a trading activity, the impugned ..... the assessing officer. however, the same was opposed to by the revenue and in support, reliance was placed upon an affidavit dated 06/05/2015 of the deputy commissioner of income tax, seeking to justify the order dated 20/02/2015 and in particular, paragraphs 8 and 10, which state as under: ??8. i say that the assessee may be only in ..... the procedure to the effect that whenever a notice to reopen an assessment under section 148 of the act is issued to an assessee, the reasons recorded in support of the same must be furnished to the assessee on his furnishing the return of income. the assessee would then have an opportunity to object to the reasons in support of the notice .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 07 2015 (HC)

M/s. Cosme Matias Menezes, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... learned counsel has thereafter taken us through para 8 of the impugned order to point out that the respondents have correctly noted that under section 239(2) (c) of the income tax act, the petitioner was supposed to file its e-returns on or before 31.03.2008 but, however, while examining the justification to condone the delay, the respondents have erroneously assumed ..... through the records. it is not disputed that the returns were to be filed by the petitioner in terms of section 239(2)(c) of the income tax act, 1961, (said act). section 239(2)(c) of the said act reads thus: ??section 239 (1) every claim for refund under this chapter shall be made in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner ..... not be examined resulting in refund not being granted. an application for condonation of delay was also filed on 06.04.2009 in filing the return of income under section 119(2) of the income tax act with the cbdt. but, however, such application was dismissed by the impugned order dated 17.12.2009. consequently, the petitioners have filed the present writ petitions. 5 ..... not uploaded in the electronic form on to the server of the income tax department. the server of the respondent uploaded the return of income on 01.04.2005 electronically. this return of income was in fact the petitioner's claim to refund of excess tax paid. however, as the filing of return of income was one day later than the due date i.e. 31 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2015 (HC)

Betts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circl ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... m.s. sanklecha, j. 1. these petitions challenge two notices both dated 22/03/2011 issued by the assessing officer under section 148 of the income tax act, 1961 (the act) seeking to reopen the petitioner's assessment for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. 2. writ petition no.639/2011 challenges the notice dated 22/03/2011 seeking ..... assessment on the ground that as additional depreciation was claimed by the petitioner, the book profits of the petitioner were reduced, leading to escapement of income chargeable to tax on application of mat under section 115jb of the act. the other two objectives of the petitioner, though adverted to, were not dealt with. 4. both the petitions were admitted on 23/11/2011 ..... period of 4 years from the end of the assessment year, the jurisdictional requirement for issuing a notice under section 148 of the act is not only the assessing officer must have reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment but there must also be a failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material ..... the same, and (c) in any view of the matter, the assessing officer could have no reason to believe that the petitioner's income assessable to tax has escaped assessment in view of the provisions of section 115jb of the act. 6. ms. a. desai, learned counsel for the respondent ?? revenue supports the impugned notice. in support, she submits as under: (a) it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 2015 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. V.S. Dempo and Company Ltd.

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... oral judgment: 1. these two appeals filed under section 260-a of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act') have been filed against two orders of the income tax appellate tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'i.t.a.t.') both dated 30 december 2005 passed for assessment year 1995-1996 and 1996-1997. 2. both these appeals were admitted ..... view taken by the assessing officer on the basis of the law as it then stood is a possible view. thus, the exercise of jurisdiction under section 263 of the act by the commissioner of income tax is not justified. in view of the above, we find no fault with the impugned order of the i.t.a.t. as the ..... . max india ltd. reported in [2007] 295 itr 282 (sc), which while dealing with the powers of revision of the commissioner of income tax in the context of section 80 hhc of the act held where two views are possible and the assessing officer has taken one view, the same cannot be treated as erroneous and prejudicial in the interest of revenue unless ..... the extent of rs.23.22 crores. 5. on 1 february 2001, the commissioner of income tax in exercise of his powers under section 263 of the act sought to revise the order dated 4 february 1999 passed under section 143 (3) of the act. the commissioner of income tax by his order dated 1 february 2001 held that the order dated 4 february 1999 is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 23 2015 (HC)

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s. Salgaonkar Mining Industries P ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... oral judgment: (m.s. sanklecha, j.) 1. this appeal, under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 (the act, for short), assails the order dated 17/01/2007 passed by the income tax appellate tribunal (tribunal). 2. the impugned order relates to assessment year 1997-1998. this appeal was admitted on 06/08/2007 on the following substantial questions of law: ??a) whether ..... of provision of doubtful debts to revise book profits and also imposition of interest under section 234b and 234c of the act, the respondent assessee filed an appeal to commissioner of income tax (appeals) (cit(a)). by an order dated 23/02/2001, the cit(a) upheld the order of the assessing officer on both counts and so far as the adjustment of book profits ..... would not be covered by clause (c) of the explanation to section 115ja(2) of the act. this is so because even if debt is not recoverable by an assessee, it cannot become as liability of the assessee. similarly, the apex court in joint commissioner of income tax vs. m/s. rolta india ltd, reported in 330 itr 470, wherein it held that ..... in terms of explanation (c) to section 115ja(2) of the act, it was noted that the provision represented advances made by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 22 2015 (HC)

V.M. Salgaocar and Brother Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Inc ...

Court : Mumbai Goa

..... ), it has been observed at paras 2 and 3 thus: ??2. the question sought to be raised in this appeal relates to the deduction under section 80-o of the income tax act, 1961 ( ??act ? for short). the tribunal has considered this question taking into account the calculations made by the assessing officer; wherein he has determined the deduction under section 80-o in ..... taken us through the orders passed by the commissioner as well as by the tribunal and pointed out that both the said authorities have misconstrued the relevant provisions of the income tax act and have accordingly erroneously rejected the contentions by restricting the deductions as effected by the assessing officer. the learned senior counsel as such submits that the appeals be allowed and ..... an order dated 16.04.2007 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. whether when the assessing officer has himself computed the deduction allowable under section 80hhc of the income tax act at rs.19,92,39,981/- was he justified in restricting the deduction that he allowed at rs. 17,40,33,719/-? 2. whether on the facts and in the ..... that there was a first round of litigation in connection with the amount which the appellant is entitled as a deduction in terms of section 80hhc of income tax act (herein after referred to as 'the said act') which this court had partially modified the directions of the tribunal though that aspect is not relevant for deciding the above appeals. the learned senior counsel .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //