New User / Register | Annual Subscription | SMS Option | Feedback |
Login: Stay
| Forget Password |
Tax Management India .com
             
TMI - Tax Management India. Com

Search in Case Laws

Refine Search / Filter

Case Laws
Text
Search as Search in: -

Filter [Optional]
Include In:
Date From To DD-MM-YYYY
Law - Section [Only for Income Tax]
Court - City
Exclude

OR
TMI Citation
or TMI - ID

To use various search filters - clik the link Refine Search / Filter above

Search Results

Showing 1301 to 1315 of 6844 Records

   

1301

2010 (6) TMI 657 - ITAT DELHI

Transocean Discoverer Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Dehradun

Perquisite, not provided by monetary payment

.......... n rsquo ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Sedco Forex International Drilling Co. Ltd. 2003 264 ITR 320 (Uttaranchal) wherein it was held that income which is subject to TDS and bona fide dispute arises at the relevant time when there are conflicting decisions of the Tribunal vis-a-vis the taxability of off-period salary due to non-resident assessees, no interest is leviable under section 234B. It was further held that Income-tax calculated under section 209(1)(b) is to be reduced by the amount of tax deductible at source and when the employer company failed to deduct tax at source for which assessee cannot be faulted, thus charging of interest under section 234B was held to be not justified. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon rsquo ble Jurisdictional High Court, we hold that in the instant appeals, no interest is leviable under section 234B of the Act. 7. In the result, all the appeals of the assessees are allowed, in terms indicated hereinabove.

1302

2010 (6) TMI 604 - ITAT DELHI

Income-tax Officer Versus Beam Estates (P.) Ltd.

Set off of interest expenditure with interest income - income from other sources - AO is of the opinion that cannot claim the adjustment of interest p.....

1303

2010 (6) TMI 523 - ITAT, MUMBAI

KEC International Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT

Slump sale or demerger - Depreciation – Addition u/s 40(a) and 43B - AO has observed that the scheme approved by the Hon’ble High Court u/s 391 to 394.....

1304

2010 (5) TMI 486 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI

Meghdoot Pistons (P.) Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Kanpur

Cenvat credit – refund - no refund of credit shall be allowed if the manufacturer avails of drawback allowed under the Customs and Central Excise Duty.....

1305

2010 (5) TMI 706 - ITAT DELHI

Satish Kumar Aggarwal Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax

-

.......... ssing Officer cannot be rectified under section 154. The sine qua non of rectification power is existence of a glaring, patent and obvious mistake, which does not cover each and every decided issue which may result in possible loss of revenue. In our view, the rectifications made in the impugned order under section 154 fall in the category of review of the order by the Assessing Officer which is not covered under section 154. Consequently, we hold that the impugned order under section 154 does not conform to the provisions in this behalf, i.e., rectification of mistake. Under these circumstances, we have no alternate but to set aside the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 and allow the assessee s claim in this behalf. Since we have held the proceedings under section 154 to be bad in law we do not go into merits. In the result, the assessee s appeal is allowed on the above terms. The order pronounced in the open court on this 28th day of May, 2010

1306

2010 (5) TMI 221 - CESTAT, MUMBAI

M/s. Em Jay Engineers Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai

Export of Services – Services rendered / services delivered outside India - Business Auxiliary Services – Refund of service tax paid - the appellant .....

1307

2010 (5) TMI 420 - Kerala High Court

Commissioner of Income-tax Versus. English Indian Clays Ltd.

Business loss - In the return, filed declaring income, the assessee claimed 100 per cent. depre- ciation amounting to Rs. 3,60,19,500 as Cost - Since .....

1308

2010 (5) TMI 227 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI

AGRAWAL COLOUR ADVANCE PHOTO SYSTEM Versus COMMR. OF C. EX., BHOPAL

Valuation- The dispute is only over the assessable value of the taxable service. The value of any taxable service shall be the gross amount charged b.....

1309

2010 (5) TMI 600 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii Lucknow Versus Rajeev Sharma, Lucknow

Reassessment proceedings - addition on account of unexplained gift - Guinness of gift - requirement of issue of notice u/s 143(2) where return filed i.....

1310

2010 (5) TMI 620 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

IN RE: MUKADAM RAFIQUE AHMED

Re-export of Imported goods - Assessee imported 6 kg Saffron - Held that - It cannot be constituted as bonafide baggage, further import of good (in co.....

1311

2010 (5) TMI 453 - UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT

The Commissioner of Income Tax & another Versus Atwood Oceanics Pacific Ltd..

Reimbursement of expenses - deduction u/s 44BB - Held that: - deduction of an amount received on account of reimbursement of mobilization charges by .....

1312

2010 (5) TMI 675 - ITAT MUMBAI

Deputy Director of Income-tax, (IT), 1(2) Versus Clough Projects International (P.) Ltd.

Double taxation relief

.......... tled to invoke the provision most beneficial to him, be they the provisions of a treaty or statute. Since the activity fell short of 120 days, the applicant could not be said to have a permanent establishment in India. The element of permanence in relation to an establishment, if any, would be attracted under article 5(2)(k) only if the installation project continues for a period of more than 120 days and that condition was not satisfied here. It was not disputed that earnings from the work performed by the applicant constituted business profits. However, in the absence of a permanent establishment, article 7 of the DTAA would not be attracted. As such, there was no tax liability on the applicant for the business profits earned by it. Thus, the ratio of this decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the assessee. Therefore, we find nothing wrong in the order of ld. CIT(A) and, accordingly, uphold the same. 11. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed.

1313

2010 (5) TMI 396 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Speedline Agencies Versus T. Stanes & Co. Ltd.

Whether after amalgamation of the original landlord with the Transferee Company, the Transferee Company is entitled to avail the benefit of the order .....

1314

2010 (5) TMI 425 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Ludhiana Versus M/s Aman Alloys Ltd., Ludhiana

Penalty and confiscation - misdeclaration - Held that: - There is nothing on record to show that the Respondent-Assessee was unaware of the actual des.....

1315

2010 (5) TMI 240 - CESTAT, CHENNAI

BSNL Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, COIMBATORE

Stay- Telephone Service- service tax of Rs.9,05,093/- confirmed on call charges collected in respect of village panchayat telephones maintained by vil.....

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

what is new what is new


© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.