Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act Year: 2012 Page 6 of about 1,977 results (0.085 seconds)

Jun 29 2012 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms. Venkatadhri Constructions

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-29-2012

..... . the assessee herein admittedly made cash payment exceeding rs.10,000/- in respect of certain business expenditure incurred by him. on the proposal to apply section 40a(3) of the income tax act, the assessee furnished the details which are extracted in the assessment order itself. the assessee contended that the payee was having regular accounts with the assessee as regards the supply ..... cheque clearing operations are suspended or other similar circumstance as aforesaid exists, will not be covered by the provisions of section 40a(3) of the income tax act provided the assessee furnishes evidence to the satisfaction of the income tax officer as to the genuineness of the payment and the identity of the payee. "7. thus, except on those circumstances, narrated under rule 6dd of ..... the income tax rules and as given under 40a(3) of the income tax act, unless there are exceptional and unavoidable circumstances, the payment made in excess of rs.10,000/- by cash would not escape the rigour of section 40a ..... (3) of the income tax act.8. as far as the present case is concerned, none of the circumstances were narrated by the assessee either before the assessing officer or before the appellate authority concerned in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 20 2012 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms.Ashok Leyland Ltd.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-20-2012

..... .12,29,523/- and the legal fee of rs.9,55,000/-, the other expenses qualified for deduction under section 35d of the income tax act. the commissioner of income tax (appeals) also agreed with the assessee that it was entitled to deduction on the expansion undertaken by it. aggrieved by this, the revenue ..... 997/99 for the assessment year 1995-96.t.c.(a) nos.1256 of 2005 is filed under section 260a of the income tax act against the order of the income tax appellate tribunal dated 04.02.2005 made in ita no.888 & 997/99 for the assessment year 1995-96.judgment(judgment of ..... expansion programme as well as for modernisation programme, which was in the form of capital expansion.14. a perusal of section 35d of the income tax act shows that the amortisation relief is granted in respect of certain preliminary expenses incurred by an assessee company, being an indian company or a person ..... went on appeal before the tribunal.7. as far as the eligibility of the assessee for claiming deduction under section 35d of the income tax act was concerned, the tribunal held that the expenditure were incurred for expansion of the industrial undertaking and hence, the same qualified for deduction. as ..... appeals relate to the disallowance of euro issue expenditure on the right of the assessee to come within the provisions of section 35d of the income tax act. on the question of the assessee's entitlement for amortisation under section 35-d, the tribunal held that as the expenditure was for extension .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 04 2012 (HC)

Ms. Premier Synthetic Industries. Vs. the Income Tax Officer

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jun-04-2012

..... . in fact he observed that the assessee had purchased the loss and hence, could not be allowed under any of the provisions of the income tax act, 1961. the officer who passed the order had considered every aspect of the transactions in detail and commented the manner in which he dealt with ..... shares?"2. the assessee herein is a partnership firm. the return originally filed by the assessee was accepted under section 143(3) of the income tax act. subsequently, while scrutinising the assessment for the assessment year 1988-89, it was found that the assessee had claimed short term capital loss on ..... 1988-89. accordingly, the assessment for assessment year 1987-88 was sought to be reopened under section 147 of the income tax act. the assessee went on appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals), who found the modus operandi adopted to purchase the shares of the premier mills limited and subsequent sale ..... sold by the assessee to the sister concern by name m/s. belathur investments private limited.3. a perusal of the order of the income tax officer shows that initially the assessee had 54390 shares in m/s. premier mills limited in the name of capricorn general finance private limited, ..... were all colourable device, as such, the claim of capital loss was rejected. aggrieved by the same, the assessee went on appeal before the income tax appellate tribunal, which remanded the matter back to the officer for a fresh consideration based on the records. as far as the assessment year 1988 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 19 2012 (HC)

Ms.Thanjavur Textiles Ltd. Vs. the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-19-2012

..... . going by the enunciation of law by the apex court that the deemed payment could not be treated as actual payment to qualify for deduction under section 43b of the income tax act, we do not agree with the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the assessee herein that depositing the amount in a bank, even if it be in a separate ..... . mcdowell and co. ltd.), the apex court considered the question as to whether furnishing of bank guarantee would entitle the assessee to claim deduction under section 43 b of the income tax act. on the bank guarantee furnished by the assessee in respect of excise duty payable on wastage of liquor in transit, the apex court pointed out that the deduction claimed by ..... 15.12.1997 to the workers based on the agreement entered into on 13.12.1997. the assessing authority viewed that as per the provisions of section 43b of the income tax act, payment of bonus would be an admissible deduction if and only the amount was actually paid before the due date for filing the return. since the amount was paid long ..... iii v. alom extrusions limited), wherein the supreme court had considered the effect of the omission of the second proviso to section 43 b of the income tax act under finance act, 2003, as having retrospective effect from 1.4.1988, he submitted that going by the deposit made in the separate account, which cannot be in any manner used by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2012 (HC)

Ms.Builtec Engineers and Builders. Vs. the Deputy Commissioner of Inco ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-18-2012

..... to be accepted, then the purport of section 269 ss itself would be lost and there is no necessity at all to the provision like section 273 d of the income tax act. the parameters which would govern an outgoing and receipt cannot be one and the same, the assessee is duty bound to justify the receipt of cash from a close relative ..... facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in law in confirming the levy of penalty of rs.7,35,475/- under section 271d of the income tax act?2. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal is right in law in rejecting the explanation offered by the appellant that the amount was ..... cause shown could not be accepted for exonerating the assessee from the rigour of penalty under section 271 d of the income tax act. in the absence of any satisfactory explanation offered for receiving cash in violation of section 269 ss of the income tax act, the tribunal confirmed the levy of penalty. aggrieved by this, the present appeal has been filed by the assessee.7 ..... the proposal of penalty and accordingly, a sum of rs.7,36,475/- was levied as penalty under section 271 d of the income tax act.3. challenging the order of penalty, the assessee filed an appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals). confirming the findings of the assessing officer, the commissioner held that the explanation offered by the assessee was far from satisfactory .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 06 2012 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax. Vs. Ms.Nepc India Limited

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Jul-06-2012

..... officer at rs.5,537.87 lakhs. the assessee further admitted rs.1,601.36 lakhs being 30% of the book profit as deemed income under section 115ja of the income tax act. evidently, the assessee did not pay the tax on the basis of the book profit calculated under section 115ja.3. it is a matter of record that on 8.7.1999, the ..... take cognizance of revised return of income filed for the purpose of arriving at the tax liability under section 115ja and to arrive at the taxable income under the provisions of the income tax act, excluding section 115a provisions also. reiterating the view already taken by the assessing officer that the revised return ..... or before 31.3.1999. aggrieved by the assessment, the assessee went on appeal before the commissioner of income tax (appeals), which was dismissed by the commissioner that the order was not an appealable order under sections 246a to 248 of the income tax act.6. during the course of scrutiny of the assessment under section 143(2), the assessee requested the assessing officer to ..... of income was non est in the eye of law, the assessing officer rejected the revised returns filed by the assessee .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 2012 (HC)

A. Kowsalya Bai and ors Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-05-2012

..... the constitution praying to declare that s.206aa of the income tax act, 1961 is unconstitutional, etc.)these petitions have been filed seeking for a declaration that s.206 aa of the income tax act, 1961 is unconstitutional and for costs.it is stated, petitioners are small investors. for depositing their savings out of their meager income, they approached respondents 3 and 4, for earning better interest ..... /returns. they do not have any source of income other than their investment. it is also stated specifically, they ..... source on such small investments would cause undue hardship, introduced s.139 a1(i) of the act in the year 1995 which enables such persons not assessable to income tax to file a declaration to that effect in the prescribed format, by which income tax would be deducted at source. s.206aa which is introduced has come into effect from 1.4.2010 as per ..... by the legislature in its wisdom. what is not in dispute is, persons whose income is below the taxable limit need not have a pan and also they need not furnish income tax declaration/returns. of course, under the finance act, it is made clear that a person whose income is less than the taxable limit is not taxable. such of the small investors who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 05 2012 (HC)

Smt A. Kowsalya Bai and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-05-2012

Reported in : 2012(3)KCCR2471

..... the constitution praying to declare that s.206aa of the income tax act, 1961 is unconstitutional, etc.)these petitions have been filed seeking for a declaration that s.206 aa of the income tax act, 1961 is unconstitutional and for costs.it is stated, petitioners are small investors. for depositing their savings out of their meager income, they approached respondents 3 and 4, for earning better interest ..... /returns. they do not have any source of income other than their investment. it is also stated specifically, they ..... source on such small investments would cause undue hardship, introduced s.139 a1(i) of the act in the year 1995 which enables such persons not assessable to income tax to file a declaration to that effect in the prescribed format, by which income tax would be deducted at source. s.206aa which is introduced has come into effect from 1.4.2010 as per ..... by the legislature in its wisdom. what is not in dispute is, persons whose income is below the taxable limit need not have a pan and also they need not furnish income tax declaration/returns. of course, under the finance act, it is made clear that a person whose income is less than the taxable limit is not taxable. such of the small investors who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 14 2012 (HC)

Dr.Meera Thinakaran Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Mar-14-2012

..... , i have no doubt in my mind to hold that a sale certificate issued by the recovery officer as provided in clause 65 of the ii second schedule to the income tax act is not an instrument of conveyance (sale deed) and it is only a document evidencing conveyance which had already taken place. in view of all the above conclusion, as has ..... of sale is declared to be the purchaser. such certificate shall bear date the day on which the sale became absolute18. a careful comparison of the above provisions of the income tax act and the civil procedure code would go to show that under order xxi rule 92 c.p.c, a sale becomes absolute, the moment an order confirming the sale is passed by ..... the sale was confirmed in his favour. thereafter, the recovery officer issued a sale certificate dated 29.10.2001 as provided in rule 65 of the ii schedule to the income tax act.3. according to the petitioner, the said sale certificate was forwarded to the third respondent for filing the same as required under section 89 of the registration ..... show that the recovery officer has to follow the procedure contemplated in the second and third schedules of the income tax act 1961 and the income tax procedures in the matter of attachment of sale of immovable properties.16. part iii of the second schedule to the income tax deals with attachment and sale of immovable property. clause 56 of the second schedule states that the sale .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2012 (HC)

Commissioner of Income Tax, VijayawadA. Vs. Ms.O.R.Distilleriesltd., T ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-27-2012

..... the same assessee, namely, m/s.o.r.distilleries ltd., tirupathi. in r.c.no.254 of 1996, the income tax appellate tribunal (itat) referred the following questions under section 256(1) of the income tax act, 1961 (the act), for opinion of this court. 1. whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the itat is correct in holding that the article ..... .c.no.77 of 1997 pertaining to assessment years 1985-1986, 1986-1987 and 1989-1980. submissions4. the junior standing counsel for income tax would submit that section 32a(2)(iii) read with item 1 of eleventh schedule of the act does not enable the assessee to claim investment allowance as they are engaged in the manufacture and production of alcoholic spirits. according ..... or thing, viz., alcohol including rectified spirit and denatured spirit manufactured by the assessee company do not come under the ambit of eleventh schedule of the i.t.act, 1961? 2 ..... as to make statute workable). if any interpretation renders an act or any of its core provisions unworkable, such interpretation should be avoided unless the legislative intention is clear and unambiguous (saurabh chaudri v union of india8, commissioner of income tax v lakshmi machine works9 and k.p.mohammed salim v commissioner of income tax10). in tinsukhia electric supply company limited v state of .....

Tag this Judgment!


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