Delhi Court January 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Poysha Oxygen Private Ltd. Vs. Dcit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-01-2004
1. The main issue arising out of this appeal relates to the addition of Rs 30 lacs on account of interest on loan given to M/s Ganga automobiles Ltd. (In short GAL).2. The assessee declared income of Rs. 29,37,500/- from dividend, Rs. 7,74,000/- from rent of cylinders and Rs. 3670/- as other income. It was noticed by the AO that assessee had not declared interest income on loan of Rs. 1 crore advanced to M/s GAL. It was also found that assessee had filed arbitration suit against the said company for the recovery of the aforesaid amount along with interest @ 30% p.a.According to the AO, the interest income had accrued to the assessee and, therefore, the sum of Rs. 30 lacs was added to the total income of the assessee.3. The matter was carried before the CIT(A) before whom it was submitted that originally the sum of Rs. 1 crore was given vide agreement dated 7.10.95 for a period of 120 days. Thereafter, it was extended from time to time. The last agreement was made on 14.2.97.However, o...
industrial Development Service Vs. Acit
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-01-2004
1.The following grounds are raised in this appeal directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) : 1. " On the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner (Appeals) is wrong in disallowing the claim u/s 80-O of the Income Tax At in respect of receipts from International Executive Service Corps and Mr. M.J. Stevens. 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) is wrong in coming to the conclusion that the payment received from International Executive Service Corps and M.J. Stevens is not for technical and professional services. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) is wrong in not allowing deduction u/s 80-O on 50% of the grass fee receipt less expenses incurred outside India in earning such income. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) is wrong in holding that deduction u/s 80-O is allowable after taking into account expenses incured in India. 5. The additions made on account of 80-O to the disclosed income are against the law and facts of the case." 2. At the outset, the Id. Counsel stated that he was no...
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Indian Management Advisors and
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-01-2004
1. These cross appeals, one by the assessee and another by the Revenue are preferred against the order of the CIT(A) pertaining to the AY-91-92.2. Since common issues are involved in these appeals, these were heard simultaneously and are being disposed of by this single consolidated order.3. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the orders of the authorities below and documents placed on record 4. Ground no. 1 in assesses' appeal and sole ground of the Revenue appeal relate the direction of the CIT(A) for allowing depreciation on soft drink bottles given on use to M/s. Coolade Beverages Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter called M/s. Coolade).5. The facts in nutshell on this issue borne out from the record are that in the year under consideration, assessee had purchased soft drink bottles from M/s. Glass and ceramics Decorators, Bombay worth Rs. 19,54,953 by means of 30 invoices during the period w.e.f. 28.3.1991 to 30.3.1991. The bottles were to be directly supplied to Ms. Coo...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›