8 2 - Judgment Search Results
Plastiblends India Limited Through Its Chairman and Managing Director ...
Court: Supreme Court of India
Decided on: Oct-09-2017
J.The singular issue which needs to be considered in these appeals pertains to claim of depreciation under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax 3 Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). Interpreting the provisions of Section … of assessing business income of an assessee under Chapter IV of the Act which is regulated by Sections 28 to 43D of the Act. Section 32 deals with depreciation and allows the deductions enumerated therein from the
Plastiblends India Ltd., a Company Incorporated Under the Companies Ac ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: (2009)223CTR(Bom)291; [2009]178TAXMAN397(Bom)
depreciation allowance ought to be deducted while computing the total income for the purposes of deduction Under Section 80HH?Factual Panorama:3. The Appellant is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The appeal is concerned with assessment … Daga, J.1. Heard. Perused appeal.2. At the behest of the Assessee, the present Appeal is filed under Section 260-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), arising from the order of
Plastiblends India Limited a Company Incorporated Under the Companies ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-2009
Reported in: 2009(111)BomLR4592; (2009)227CTR(Bom)1; [2009]318ITR352(Bom); 2010(1)MhLj526; [2009]185TAXMAN187(Bom)
under the Act, the assessee determined the gross total income, on which 100% deduction was claimed under Section 80IA of the Act.6. The above return of income was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and intimation … J.P. Devadhar, J.1. This appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`Act' for short) was initially heard by a Division Bench of this
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Palmtrade Services P. Ltd., Mumbai Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2)(4 ...
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-31-2014
14A of the Act. 1.2. the Ld CIT (A) failed to appreciate that on proper computation under Rule 8D the disallowance would be only Rs.1,797/-. 2.1. The Ld CIT (A) erred in not admitting the letter dated
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free