Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 1991 1991 (1) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA Law of Competition 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-- 2025 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 >= 2 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 381 to 385 of 385 Records

• 1991 (1) TMI 5
  
  The High Court of Karnataka upheld the decision of the Appellate Tribunal regarding allowing depreciation on additions made towards roads and drains, citing a previous court decision in CIT v. Bangalore Turf Club Ltd. [1984] 150 ITR 23. The question was answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue.

  ---

• 1991 (1) TMI 4
  
  The High Court of Karnataka upheld the Commissioner's decision to allow depreciation on approach roads, investment allowance on a generating station building, and deduction under section 80J for units commissioned by the assessee company. The court ruled in favor of the assessee on all three questions based on relevant case law and evidence presented.

  ---

• 1991 (1) TMI 3
  
  Issues:
  1. Interpretation of section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding taxation of a written back amount.
  2. Dispute over the taxability of Rs. 26,08,065 written back and credited to the profit and loss account.
  3. Assessment of tax liability on the written back amount pending litigation in the Bombay High Court.
  4. Refusal of the Tribunal to refer the question of law to the High Court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act.
  
  Analysis:
  The case involved an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, seeking a reference to the High Court regarding the taxability of an amount written back and credited to the profit and loss account. The dispute centered around whether the sum of Rs. 26,08,065, written back by the assessee-company maintaining its books on the mercantile system, could be taxed under section 41(1) of the Act for the assessment year 1981-82. The assessee contended that the amount was not taxable as the decision to write it back was unilateral and the liability was pending determination in the Bombay High Court.
  
  During the assessment, the assessing authority added the written back amount to the total income of the assessee, which was challenged in an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner held that there was no cessation of liability as the creditor had not abandoned the claim, and litigation was ongoing in both the Rajasthan and Bombay High Courts. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal, which upheld the Commissioner's decision, leading to an application to refer the question to the High Court under section 256(2) of the Act.
  
  The High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, declined to call for the statement of facts, stating that no question of law arose in the case. The court noted that the dispute between the parties was ongoing, with a pending suit for recovery in the Bombay High Court. However, the court mentioned that if the suit were to be decided in favor of the assessee in the future, the Revenue would have the opportunity to include the amount as income. Ultimately, the application for reference was rejected by the High Court, emphasizing the ongoing nature of the dispute and the lack of a legal question necessitating a reference at that stage.

  ---

• 1991 (1) TMI 2
  
  The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's order granting a refund to the assessee-respondent based on the decision in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of India [1985] 152 ITR 308. The writ petition was dismissed, and there was no order as to costs.

  ---

• 1991 (1) TMI 1
  

  Whether in an appeal filed under section 248, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to deal with the quantum of the sum chargeable under the provision of the said Act from which the assessee was liable to deduct tax under section 195 thereof - held that AAC's right is not restricted to total denial; but covers partial denial also with reference to payment subjected to deduction of tax at source.

  ---

1 ....1617181920