Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1997 1997 (2) 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

Case Laws

Showing 461 to 465 of 465 Records

• 1997 (2) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Held that the moment an asset is acquired or purchased for the purpose of the business, it is capital employed, though the asset as such is not actually utilised or used during the accounting year. In the chain of events, the earliest event is the purchase or acquisition of the asset. That by itself entitles the assessee to get the relief. The "employment" of the capital is done or over. The subsequent or later events, including the actual user of the asset, have nothing to do in the matter

  ---

• 1997 (2) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Collaboration agreement between the assessee & foreign company - Royalty - it is difficult to hold that the entire payment made is revenue expenditure merely because the payment is required to be made at a certain percentage of the rates of the gross turnover of the products of the assessee as royalty - Tribunal was right in holding that 25 per cent. of the amount paid by the assessee as royalty, was capital expenditure and, therefore, not allowable as a revenue expenditure

  ---

• 1997 (2) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Registered society - run manage, assist college, schools & other educational organisations existing solely for educational purposes - objects of the society was to promote education through various media like schools & colleges - entitled for exemption u/s. 10(22)

  ---

• 1997 (2) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT
  

  I. T. O. brought to tax the accumulated profits of a company in liquidation representing the sale of the companies assets as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(c) - Once it is profit, it is so for all purposes, and any distribution made out of such an amount should be assessed in the hands of shareholders as dividends - Section 41(2) of the 1961 Act plainly makes the "excess" amount "chargeable" as "income". If it is so, it will be taken in by section 2(24) - matter referred to larger bench

  ---

• 1997 (2) TMI 1 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI
  

  Service Tax - New assessee not conversant with the filing of tax (1) Non-filing of ST-3 return (2) Penalty

  ---

1 ....2021222324