Home Case Index All Cases Income TaxIncome Tax Section Wise 2006 2006 2006 (10) Income Tax - 2006 (10) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Income Tax - Case Laws

Showing 121 to 140 of 141 Records

• 2006 (10) TMI 90 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Interest on loans raised for business purpose – advanced loans amount on interest free basis to certain parties – tribunal wasn’t justified in allowing deduction for the interest on the ground that there was no direct nexus between the borrowing & interest free advances – revenue’s appeal allowed

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 89 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
  

  Disallowance of telephone expenses installed at the residence of the partners is justified but disallowance is restricted to 1/7th of such expenses – borrowed money used to grant interest free loans to sister concern for non-business purposes hence interest is not allowed for deduction

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 88 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Validity of CBDT’s instruction that Assessing Officer can refer to Transfer Price Officer if transaction value increase more than Rs 5 crore – such instruction are based on correct interpretation of relevant provisions and are not contrary to the objective of chapter X so these are valid

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 87 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Order passes on account undervaluation in pursuance of evidence given by petitioner respect of transfer of two other flats – above 2 instances weren’t made available to petitioners to enable them to defend so order passed u/c XX-C are liable to be set aside

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 86 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Penalty imposed on account of concealment of income as returned income was shown lesser than assessed income – apart from assessment proceedings no any fresh material or any fresh evidence produced by assessee in the penalty proceedings to show their innocence so penalty imposed is justified

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 85 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Writ petition against orders passed u/r 11(5) rejecting the objections of the assessee – held that alternative remedy by way of filing a suit is available with assessee u/r 11(6) so writ court is not going to interfere with the impugned writ petition

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 84 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
  

  Tribunal is right to decline to permit the assessee to produce additional evidence (stock register) before it for the first time – Accounts disclosed by assessee rejected as stock register was not produced – tribunal is justified in sustaining the adhoc addition

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 83 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Charitable trust – the fact that some of the devotees were given cash assistance could not be a ground to hold that all the beneficiaries were identifiable or the trust was private trust – held that impugned trust is public charitable trust.

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 82 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
  

  Expenditure on replacement of machinery and expenditure on up gradation of computers by changing certain parts will be treaded as revenue expenditure not capital expenditure.

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 81 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
  

  Deduction u/s 80G – CIT(A) directed AO to treat the trust as a charitable trust and delete the addition – Department has filed a further appeal against the order of the CIT(A) and the appeal is still pending – Court unable to reach final conclusion

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 80 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  In cases of litigation between Government bodies prior clearance by the COD to litigate is mandatory and in a situation within a month of filing an appeal also permitted – HC before deciding the matter ascertained that whether assessee would qualify mandatory requirement or not

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 79 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
  

  Business Expenditure – AO added an amount to the total income of assessee on the ground of that the assessee had pay huge amounts in cash to its sister unit exceeding the prescribed limit – Not finding any exceptional circumstances under rule 6DD(j)(1)and (2), hence addition sustained

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 77 - HIGH COURT, GAUHATI
  

  Penalty - Tribunal imposed penalty on the assessee in respect to delay in furnishing of audit report without providing any reasonable cause for delay - HC found no error in the tribunal order and upheld the order of tribunal

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 76 - HIGH COURT, DELHI
  

  Direction for special audit u/s 142(2A) - Article 226 of the constitution cannot be invoked all that is to be consider is whether the decision making process is vitiated - Direction u/s 142(2A) are unexceptionable and valid

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 75 - HIGH COURT, BOMBAY
  

  Special Deduction - Revenue contended that for computing total income the depreciation will have to be deducted before making any deduction under Chapter VI-A of the ITA, 1961 but assessee view is contrary to the revenue contention - Held that revenue contention was correct and allowed

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 73 - HIGH COURT, RAJASTHAN
  

  Reassessment - While one reassessment proceedings are pending another reassessment proceeding not permissible - the another reassessment is passed in respect to escaped income belong to society is of assessee - reassessment order can't sustained

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 71 - HIGH COURT, KERALA
  

  Exemption – AO contended that in order to claim exemption under rule 6DD(j), assessee has to prove the identity of payee and genuineness of transactions – Held the AO contention was correct and allowed

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT, ALLAHABAD
  

  Valuation of stock - Assessee adopted two different methods of valuation of closing stock - Held that two different methods of valuation of closing stock not permissible

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 68 - ITAT, KOLKATA
  

  Penalty - Alleged that(i) assessee concealed his income (ii) assessee had shown the closing stock in the trading account and balance sheet at different figures - Held (i) allegation not sustained (ii) allegation is correct and penalty sustained

  ---

• 2006 (10) TMI 67 - HIGH COURT, DELHI
  

  Authority - Tribunal recall its earlier decision to rectify mistake without construed as a mistake apparent on the record - Held that tribunal has no power to recall and review order

  ---

1 ....345678