Advanced Search Results

Vbc Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

project for providing telecommunication services on or after the 1st day of April, 1995 ; III Again, vide Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, some more vital conditions were introduced in Section 10(23G), which read as follows: (h) for Clause (23G), the … for development. It is, therefore, necessary to provide tax exemption under the aforesaid provisions of Section 10 and Section 36 to attract investment in these areas.He further referred to Circular No. 772 dated 23-12-1998, issued by CBDT, on

General Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inco ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Insurance Act, 1938; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 28, 30 to 43B, 44 and 143(3); Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987; Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998; Income Tax Act, 1922; Income Tax Rules - Rule 5

Reported in : (2005)199CTR(Bom)391; [2006]284ITR613(Bom)

in adding back the aforestated amount of Rs. 1.18 crores. He contended that Rule 5 was amended by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, w.e.f. 1st April, 1989. He contended that the judgments relied upon by the assessee have no application as … for bad and doubtful debts' did not constitute a write off of the debts for the purposes of Section 36 of the Act.3. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant had preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) by his

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. General Insurance Corporation of India ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income-tax Act, 1961 - Sections 36, 36(1) and 80M - Schedule - Rule 5

Reported in : [2002]254ITR204(Bom)

adding back the aforestated amount of Rs. 1.18 crores. He contended that Rule 5 was amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, with effect from April 1,1989. He contended that the judgments relied upon by the assessee have no application … 1961 ?2. Whether the assessee has violated Rule 5 of the First Schedule to the Act, read with Section 36(1)(vii), by debiting an amount of Rs. 1.18 crores to the profit and loss account under the head 'Reserve

Omkar S. Kanwar Vs. Union of India

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2001)170CTR(Guj)354

Difficulties) Order, 1998, issued by the Central Government in exercise of powers conferred by section 97(l) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, promulgating Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as 'KVS Scheme') and as the 'Order of 1998' … within a reasonable period and to curtail litigation with consequential benefit to the taxpayers to some extent. [Para 36] Case Law Analysis: Mathew M. Thomas v. CIT (1999) 8 DTC 6 (SC) : (1999) 236 ITR 691

State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (1999)65TTJ(JP.)480

in Aditya V. Birla (supra). It cannot be said that the amendment introduced in s. 80-0 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, is so inconsistent with the provisions of s. 80RRA as to rebut the presumption against implied repeal. … is against confirmation of disallowance of claim of the appellant regarding bad debt which assessee has claimed under section 36(1)(vii).This ground for both the years, we will take first for disposal.Brief facts regarding this issue are that

Core Health Care Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2001)70TTJ(Ahd.)490

main function relates to new projects including expansion of capacities (Purchase Department, Finance Department, etc).(c) Travelling expenses in connection with purchases of equipments, raising of … the Honble President in the month of May, 1998 (precisely on 6-5-1998), Thereafter he should not have … were only covered by section 35D is erroneous.(b) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not disposing of ground No 2(b)(i) of the appeal relating to inclusion of Rs. 200 lakhs of non-convertible debentures which were already allotted on … submits that this expenditure is fully allowable under section 37(1) of the Act.The Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in not allowing the total expenditure on advertisement … Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not allowing interest paid on borrowings amounting to Rs. 1,56,76,000 as a deduction under section 36(1)(iii).(3) The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not allowing the following expenditure as revenue expenditure : On the facts and

Vinod Khatri Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)82TTJ(Delhi)911

AO is a negative figure," 6. With effect from 1st Oct., 1998, Section 253(6) was amended by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 enhancing the Court fee for filing appeals before the Tribunal. This amended provision which came into force w.e.f. … and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. (2001) 165 CTE (SC) 672 : (2001) 247 ITR 36 (SC); (iv) CIT v. Swat Jilla Kamdar Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (1993) 201 ITR 157 (Guj); and 7. The

Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Asr.)728

clause; (d) 'long-term finance' shall have the meaning assigned to it in Clause (viii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 36; (e) 'co-operative bank' shall have the meaning assigned to it in Clause (dd) of Section 2 of the … 10(23G) and allowed by the AO, the assessee submitted that provisions of this section were inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 w.e.f. 1st April, 1997 and eversince the assessee had been claiming and is being allowed exemption under … Section 10(23G). Reliance was also placed on Circular No. 762 dt.18th Feb., 1998, which contains the Explanatory Notes for insertion of this section in the

U.P. State Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. Vs. Additional Commiss ...

Court : Allahabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Finance Act, 1998 - Sections 86 and 87

Reported in : [1999]238ITR669(All)

account of the petitioner. This amount was actually received by the Department on August 29, 1998. Under the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, under Section 86 and onwards the scheme known as the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, was introduced which

Punjab State Industrial Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2007)292ITR268(Chd.)

of Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India (supra) and also contrary to the amendment made by Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998 with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1968. It is so held by the Supreme Court. So the decision … permissible on the net dividend to be determined after deducting proportionate administrative expenses and also deduction allowed under Section 36(1)(iii) from the gross dividend. The assessee's appeal against the decision of the Tribunal is pending in the High