Mumbai Court August 2000 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Punit Commercial Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: [2000]245ITR550(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. Since all the above three appeals deal with common questions of fact and law they are jointly disposed of by this judgment.2. The assessee is a 100 per cent, exporter. The assessee is wholly engaged in export business. The entire business income is from exports. The assessee credited in the profit and loss account for the assessment year 1989-90, interest income while working out the deduction under Section 80HHC by considering these amounts as part of business profit. The Assessing Officer held that interest income cannot be treated as profit relating to business exports and, accordingly, while working out the business profits for the purposes of Section 80HHC, the Assessing Officer reduced the interest income from the business profit. The Assessing Officer held that the deduction under Section 80HHC was meant for the assessee who earnedprofits from exports and any business profits other than from export activity was not eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC. B...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pink Star
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: [2000]245ITR757(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The assessee is an exporter of diamonds. While making the assessment, the Assessing Officer allowed deduction under Section 80HHC of Rs. 63,78,088 as against the claim for Rs. 88,40,538. This was mainly on the ground that in the computation of profit of the business, the licence premium was taken by the Assessing Officer as nil whereas the assessee claimed the deduction under the said head at Rs. 21,34,030. Similarly, the Assessing Officer treated the premium on import licence in the assessment order as local turnover whereas the assessee claimed that it was an export incentive and, therefore, was not entitled to be treated as turnover. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who gave certain directions for verifications. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal which allowed the claim of the assessee, inter alia, directing the Assessing Officer to recompute the deductions under S...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd.,
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: (2000)163CTR(Bom)596; [2000]245ITR769(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. All the above appeals deal with a common question of law and facts and, therefore, they are decided together by this judgment. For the sake of convenience, however, the facts in Income-tax Appeal No. 120 of 2000 are mentioned hereinbelow.2. Income-tax Appeal No. 120 of 2000 concerns the assessment year 1994-95. The Assessing' Officer held that sales tax and excise duty are statutory levies and, therefore, they constitute trading receipts. Accordingly, he recomputed the deduction under Section 80HHC by including the above two items in the total turnover. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who allowed the claim of the assessee relying on the earlier judgment of the Tribunal for the earlier years in the assessee's own case in which the Tribunal held that sales tax and excise duty should be excluded from the total turnover while working out the deduction under Section 80HHC. Being aggrieved by t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. K.K. Doshi and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: (2000)163CTR(Bom)472; [2000]245ITR849(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. Both the above appeals raise a common question of law and fact. Hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The short point which arises for consideration in the above two appeals is whether service charges constituted business income for the purposes of computing export profits under Section 80HHC.3. The assessee credited in the profit and loss account for the assessment year 1990-91, service charges while working out deduction under Section 80HHC by considering the said service charges as part of business profit. The assessee applied the formula under Section 80HHC(3)(b) and worked out the deduction at Rs. 90,54,447. The assessee-firm are diamond merchants. The Assessing Officer held that service charges cannot be treated as profit relating to export business. The Assessing Officer reduced the service charges from business profits and worked out the deduction at Rs. 77,18,329. The Assessing Officer held that deduction under Section 80HHC was only meant f...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.G. Jhaveri Consultancy Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: (2000)163CTR(Bom)593; [2000]245ITR854(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Department. It concerns the assessment year 1980-90. The assessee is a manufacturer, trader and exporter of diamonds. While calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC(3), the assessee included labour charges, assistance and service charges as also interest in the business profits while applying the formula: Business profits X Export turnover/Total turnover. The Assessing Officer rejected the calculations submitted by the assessee. However, the Tribunal has accepted the claim of the assessee for inclusion of the above items in the business profits in the above formula. Hence, the Department has come in appeal. In the case of CIT v. K.K. Doshi and Co. : [2000]245ITR849(Bom) , in Income-tax Appeal No. 77 of 2000, this court has taken the view that receipts like interest, commission, etc., cannot be included in the business profits as the said items do not have any linkage with the export activities. This court has held that a combine...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Samir Diamonds Exports Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: [2000]245ITR548(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The short point which arises for consideration in this appeal is : Whether the Department was right in recomputing the deductions under Section 80HHC by including interest on refunds and interest on loans in the total turnover By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has excluded the above two items from the total turnover. Hence, this appeal by the Department.2. Mr. Deodhar, learned counsel for the Department, contended that having regard to the plain words of the section, the above two items were required to be included in the total turnover. He contended that the Legislature in its wisdom excluded only two items, viz., freight and insurance, which pre-supposes that all other items were intended to be included in the total turnover. He contended that the Legislature has used the words 'total turnover' in contradistinction to the word 'turnover' which presupposes that the Legislature clearly intended that all amounts for which goods are bought or sold, should form par...
Rajson Pen and Plastic Industries Vs. Sarita Sonaba Gurav and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: (2001)IIILLJ831Bom
T.K. Chandrashekhara Das, J.1. This Writ Petition is for challenging the impugned order in the complaint (ULP) 1249/91 dated January 12, 1999 passed by the Member, Industrial Court, Bombay wherein it was found that the Petitioner was engaged in unfair labour practices under Item Nos. 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 on or about September 7, 1991. It is also directed by the impugned order to reinstate the respondent within one month from that day with continuity of services and back wages with effect from September 7, 1991.2. The matter arises on a complaint made by the respondent before the Industrial Court alleging that the Petitioner Ashok R. Ahuja is the manager and proprietor of Rajson Pen & Plastic Industries, has indulged in unfair labour practices by forcing complainant's resignation from the establishment of the Petitioner. She alleges that she is a permanent worker drawing a salary of Rs. 126...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pink Star
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: (2000)163CTR(Bom)589; [2001]112TAXMAN492(Bom)
Kapadia, J.The assessee is an exporter of diamond. While filing the assessment, the assessing officer allowed deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') of Rs. 63,78,088 as against the claim for Rs. 88,40,538. This was mainly on the ground that in the computation of profit of the business, the licence premium was taken by the assessing officer as nil whereas the assessee claimed the deduction under the said Head at Rs. 21,34,030. Similarly, the assessing officer treated the premium on import licence in the assessment order as local turnover whereas the assessee claimed that it was an export incentive and, therefore, was not entitled to be treated as a turnover. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) who gave certain directions for verifications. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Tribunal which allowed the claim of the assessee, inter alia directing the assessing of...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sudarshan Chemicals Industries Ltd
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: [2001]112TAXMAN511(Bom)
Kapadia, J.All the above appeals deal with common question of law and facts and, therefore, they are decided together by this judgment. For the sake of convenience, however, facts in Income-tax Appeal No. 120 of 2000 are mentioned hereinbelow.2. Income-tax Appeal No. 120 of 2000 concerns the assessment year 1994-95. The assessing officer held that sales-tax and excise duty are statutory levies and, therefore, they constituted trading receipts. Accordingly, he recomputed the deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') by including the above two items in the total turnover. Being aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who allowed the claim of the assessee relying on the earlier judgment of the Tribunal for the earlier years in the assessee's own case in which the Tribunal held that sales-tax and excise duty should be excluded from the total turnover while working out deduction under ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. K.K. Doshi and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-2000
Reported in: [2001]112TAXMAN503(Bom)
Kapadia, J.Both the above appeals raise common question of law and fact. Hence, they are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The short point which arises for consideration in the above two appeals is whether service charges constituted business income for the purposes of computing export profits under section 80HHC.3. The assessee credited in the profit and loss account for the assessment year 1990-91, service charges while working out deduction under section 80HHC by considering the said service charges as part of business profit. The assessee applied the formula under section 80HHC(3)(b) and worked out the deduction at Rs. 90,54,447. The assessee-firm are diamond merchants. The assessing officer held that service charges cannot be treated as profit relating to export business. The assessing officer reduced the service charges from business profits and worked out the deduction at Rs. 77,18,329. The assessing officer held that deduction under section 80HHC was only meant for the ass...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »