Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2008 2008 (2) 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 461 to 480 of 863 Records

• 2008 (2) TMI 411
  

  Payment related to advice on business strategy, marketing and sales planning, possibilities of joint venture and acquisition, etc., etc. –the assessee has already commenced its business and, therefore, the first part of section 35D of the Act would not be applicable the assessee has already commenced its business and, therefore, the first part of section 35D of the Act would not be applicable - the assessee does not have any industrial undertaking and, therefore, the second part of section 35D, would also not be applicable - the expenses incurred towards consultancy charges are for the purposes of carrying out the existing business more efficiently. - Regarding the applicability of section 43A of the Act with regard to additional liability incurred on account of fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate - held that the additional liability was for the purpose of the business of the assessee and not in relation to a capital expense. On this basis, the Tribunal allowed a deduction of the enhanced liability of the assessee. – Revenue appeal dismissed.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 410
  

  Expenditure on repairs of rental premises and plumbing work - The Assessing Officer disallowed both the claims as he was of the opinion that these two items were capital expenditure of the assessee - Sections 30 to 36 of the Act provides for various deductions which is available while computing the income from business and profession. Section 37 is a general section which provides for deduction of expenditure not included in any of the sections 30 to 36 of the Act. - the provisions of section 37 of the Act cannot be given a restricted meaning. Mere fact that the claim does not fall in any of the sections 30 to 36 will not automatically make the claim unsustainable under section 37(1) of the Act as well. Section 37 being a general section, is for grant of deduction on certain accounts not enumerated in sections 30 to 36 of the Act

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 409
  

  Stock in Trade – Exemption from Wealth Tax - The contention of the assessee that this property fell to his share after the partnership firm, in which this property was held as stock-in-trade, was dissolved. It was contended by him that even though the firm has dissolved, but it is pertinent to note that the said firm all through held it as stock-in-trade. Consequently, on its dissolution, the same would continue in the same status, but in the hands of the assessee. – AO held that said property can not be held as stock in trade in the hands of the assessee after dissolution – ITAT held that said property can be held as stock in trade since the same treatment was being by the firm – held that order of tribunal requires reconsideration and matter remitted to AO.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 408
  

  Deduction u/s 80HHC – Machining Charges – ITAT held that the machining charges are not to be excluded for the purposes of determining the ‘profits of the business’ as defined in clause (baa) of the Explanation to sub-section (4B) of section 80HHC of the Act – Held that when the Tribunal had been taking inconsistent view for different assessment years, matter remanded to ITAT

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 407
  

  Export – Negative export profits - Undoubtedly, section 80HHC has been incorporated with a view to provide incentive to export houses. Even though a liberal interpretation has to be given to such a provision, interpretation has to be as per the wording of the section. If the wording of the section is clear, then the benefits which are not available under the section can not be conferred by ignoring or misinterpreting words in the section - negative export profits can not be ignored when aggregating the total turnover including other export by not taking into consideration the specific definition adduced in section 80HHC read with section 80AB of the Act for the purpose of computing deduction under section 80HHC of the Act – decided in favor of revenue – tribunal order is not correct.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 406
  

  Director’s Liability – Recovery of Dues – There is provision in the law in question to recover amount from directors or shareholders personally - That being so, if revenue still proceed against the property of directors that would amount to depriving the director of his property without any authority of law and it would be a direct infringement of the constitutional right conferred upon the director vide Article 300-A of the Constitution - Whenever the State proceed to infringe constitutional protection of any person, this Court being the constitutional protector is bound to protect such person from such infringement, is bound to act upon and come to rescue to such person, and, against such unconstitutional act of the State. - Held that no recovery can be made against the director.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 405
  

  Exemption under notification no. 20/99 Cus - whether the Nylon Zipper Long Chain without slider imported by the respondent and cleared under bill of entry dated 6-12-1999 is eligible for the benefit of exemption under Customs Notification No. 20/99, dated 28-2-1999 (S. No. 294) - Sl. No. 294 of the Notification after referring the tariff Heading 56.01, 96.06 or 96.07, describe the goods which are exempted from payment of customs duty as “Fasteners and poly wadding materials”. Thus, as could be seen from the Notification, any fastener and poly wadding materials, which comes under the tariff Headings 56.01, 96.06, 96.07, are totally exempted from payment of customs duty. – Exemption available.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 404
  

  Recovery of Cenvat / Modvat Credit – inputs found short and written off in books of account - The petitioner provisionally debited an amount of Rs.1.50 lakhs on 22-5-1999 towards the short fall of Modvat inputs and undertaken to pay the balance, if any. The petitioner declared the inputs as shortage and written off in the balance sheet. So, that shows that the goods are not available and it has not been used for in or in relation to manufacture of any excisable goods. Rule 57-I provides for recovery f credit wrongly availed or utilised in irregular manner. Hence, in respect of the goods, which are found shortage and written off in the books of account on which credit has been taken, is sought to be reversed and in default of the same, penal consequences are taken against the petitioner – appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 403
  

  Non-Challenge of Bill of Entry / Assessment – Refund of duty paid without claiming rebate for which importer entitled to - the appellant filed the bill of entry and allowed the proper officer to assess the same on the value stated in the invoice and declared in the Bill of Entry. After three or four months, the appellant approached the ‘appellate authority stating that he was entitled to certain reductions by way of quality discount and dispatch earnings, which has not been considered by the proper officer. The claim was rejected on the ground that the bill of entry has been assessed finally and the appellant has not demurred anything about the assessment and claimed any deduction but accepted the assessment and cleared the goods and the Tribunal has also doubted the credibility of the document. – Held that refund is not allowable.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 402
  

  Territorial Jurisdiction of Criminal Court - M/s. J.R. Electronics (which was later reconstituted as J.R. Consumer Electronics Private Limited) had been importing Akai brand colour TV sets in semi-knocked down (“SKD”) form through the port of Mumbai by misdeclaring the same as components of colour TVs. The factory premises of M/s. J.R. Electronics at Noida, U.P., where the colour TVs were assembled, were searched by the Officers of the DRI, New Delhi – held that ACMM, New Delhi did not have jurisdiction to try the criminal complaint filed by the Respondent DRI against the petitioners - court at Mumbai will proceed to deal with the complaint from the stage of its presentation to it and decided afresh about taking cognizance of the offences and issuing summons to the accused uninfluenced by the impugned order passed by the learned ACMM, New Delhi.

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 401
  

  Legislature has contemplated complexity of different nature in Sections 142(2A) and 245D of the Act. The expression used in Section 142(2A) of the Act, is “complexity of the accounts of the assessee,” whereas in Section 245D(1), the expression is “complexity of the investigation.” Though the word “complexity” is common in both these provisions, it does not automatically follow that the respective authorities exercising their powers under these two different provisions have to take into consideration the same materials while taking their decision - The date of the order of rejection of the petitioners’ application is 31-5-2007. It was despatched to the petitioners under the cover of a letter dated 12th June 2007. The petitioners claim to have received this communication on 14-6-2007 – held that the date of order shall remain as 31-5-2007 – Deviation from established procedure if not fatal or prejudice to assessee the same can not make the proceedings liable to be dismissed..

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 400
  

  Nature and effect of amendment to Section 43B – payment of contribution to provident fund - the amendment is made applicable from the assessment year 2004-05. The section as it stood earlier was that the employers’ contribution to provident fund if not paid within the due date the employer was not entitled to deduction – held that amendment is prospective and not retrospective - dismissal of the special leave petition cannot be said to be the law decided

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 399
  

  Bad Debts - if the assessee has written off the debt as a bad debt, that would satisfy the purpose of the section 36(1)(vii) – Deduction is allowed despite the debt has not become bad – merely written off in the books of account are sufficient

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 398
  

  Whether the assessee is entitled to deduction of Rs.1,16,89,327/- incurred as 'Issue Management Expenses' - Reading the judgments of the Tribunal and the High Court, we find that the assessee has succeeded only on the basis of 'Rule of Consistency'. In our view, the High Court should have examined the nature of the said expenses - In our view, substantial question of law did arise for determination - Consequently, the impugned judgment of the HC is set aside and the matter is remitted to HC

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 397
  

  Capital gains - held that section 45(5)(b) will be attracted only when the assessee receives the enhanced compensation in pursuance of a final award/order of a court, Tribunal or other authority increasing the compensation. If any amount is received after stay of the award, in pursuance of any interim order, as a payment subject to the final result, it will not be an amount received as enhanced compensation as contemplated u/s 45(5)(b) - amendment to S. 45 by inserting clause (c) would not apply prior to April 1, 2004, or any assessment year prior to the A.Y. 2004-05

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 396
  

  Revenue challenging the order of the Tribunal cancelling the interest levied u/s 234B and 234C, for non-payment/short payment of advance tax on 30 per cent. of the book profit as deemed income assessed u/s 115J – there is no provision either under Chapter XVII or Chapter XII-B requiring the assessee to estimate book profit and to remit advance tax thereon - the provision for advance tax under Chapter XVII do not have any application for the tax payable u/s 115J - Revenue appeal dismissed –tribunal’s order is upheld

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 395
  

  Service tax credit paid on erection and commissioning of Wind Mills for generation of electricity situated away from the appellant’s factory - It is admitted position that the electricity generated at the wind mill firm unit is not being supplied directly to the appellant, but is transferred to PGVCL, who are further supplying the same to the appellant - It cannot be said that the said wind mill firm unit is a part of the appellant’s factory premises so as to allow credit of service tax paid in respect of services utilized at the wind mill firm house – appeal rejected

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 394
  

  Assessee is contesting special excise duty on the grounds that the goods manufactured and cleared are in fact the parts of the air-conditioning machines (not air-conditioning machines as alleged) because it is not equipped with the motor driven fans and blowers to change temperature and humidity therefore the goods cannot be subjected to special excise duty in view of Notification No. 22/2000 - revenue’s contention is that condensing units should be considered as air-conditioners is not appropriate – assessee’s contention is accepted

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 393
  

  Benefit of Notification No. 10/97-CE stands denied to the appellants in respect of air-conditioners manufactured by them and supplied to various Public Funded Research Institution on the ground that air-conditioners cannot be considered as scientific and technical equipment - there is no definition of scientific and technical instrument in the notification so as to restrict the scope of the same relatable to the use of the goods - Revenue has not been able to show any evidence on record as to why the air-conditioner which is scientific and technical instrument should be denied the benefit of Notification

  ---

• 2008 (2) TMI 392
  

  Whether the appellant is entitled to deduction on account of packing – packing boxes stand returned by some of their customers - observation of the Commissioner (Appeals) that no evidence has been produced showing return of the packing material are factually incorrect – moreover, it is settled law that deduction on account of durable and returnable packing is allowed irrespective of the fact that the same has been actually returned or not – impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed

  ---

1 ....202122232425262728........ 44