Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 1968 section 2 income tax Court: income tax appellate tribunal itat jaipur Page 2 of about 337 results (0.253 seconds)

Golcha Minerals (P) Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2005)3SOT476(JP.)

..... of processed minerals and ores, also the benefit of this section, the finance (no. 2) act, 1991 with effect from 1-4-1991 wherein it was laid down that "processed mineral and ores specified in the twelfth schedule would be considered for deduction under section 80hhc. the same finance act inserted the twelfth schedule. this schedule provides the list ..... of the processes which the minerals and ore specified therein should undergo for being covered by the exception provided in section 80hhc(2)(b)(ii) of the act. on being asked by the learned commissioner(a ..... applied his mind to the facts and he has not found any opinion. he also submitted that this case will not fall under the proviso of section 147 of the act as the assessment had been reopened with the limit of 4 years. for this purpose, he relied upon the following case laws: 1. pralul .....

Mahaveer Kumar JaIn Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (1993)45ITD634(JP.)

..... ), finds it difficult to agree with his further views that "mere fact that section 5 would be applicable does not automatically mean that all the provisions of it act and the finance act would be applicable". in the opinion of this bench once the provisions of section 5 are found applicable to the case of a person computation of his total ..... the hands of the partners, the distinction a charging and a machinery section is of no consequence. both the sections have to be read together and construed harmoniously. it is significant that similar provisions have ..... such taxation. it is true that section 3 is the general charging section. even if section 23(5) provides for the machinery for collection and recovery of the tax, once the legislature has, in clear terms, indicated that the income of the firm can be taxed in accordance with the finance act of 1956 as also the income in .....

Subhash Gupta (individual) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2003)78TTJ(JP.)692

..... of penalty would not arise.the above position was also recognised by the legislature and clause (iii) to section 271(1)(c) was amended by finance act, 2002, w.e.f. 1st april, 2003. the corresponding provision of the finance bill i.e., section 101 provided as under: "in clause (c)(iii), for the words "in addition to any tax ..... respect of above referred to amendment : "the existing provisions contained in clause (iii) of the aforesaid sub-section (1) provides for a penalty, in addition to any tax payable, of a sum which shall not ..... payable", the words "in addition tp tax, if any, payable" shall be substituted w.e.f. the first day of april, 2003." the notes accompanying the finance act, 2002, provided as under in .....

H.H. Rahdadi Smt. Badan Kanwar Vs. Wealth-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (1989)28ITD69(JP.)

..... copy of the accounts submitted along with the return of wealth does not suggest any expenditure incurred for the benefit of any person referred in section 13(3) of the it act, 1961. therefore, section 21a of the wt act is also not applicable. shri k.c. prashar also confirmed this fact vide order sheet dt. 20-3-1984. the trust is recognised ..... of the wt act with reference to section 13 of the it act, as he found that the substantial investment was made by the trust in m/s marudhar hotels pvt. ltd., a subsidiary company of m/s jodhan investment & finance corpn. pvt. ltd., in which the settlor was provided with two rent-free suites in the premises of m/s umaid bhavan ..... and the invoking of section 25(2) by him is fully justified. he drew support from the following authorities, vis., thalibai f. jain v. ito [1975] 1011tr 1 (kar.) ; addl. cit v. mukur corpn. [1978] 111 itr 312 (guj.) ; gee vee enterprises v. addl. cit [1975] 99 itr 375 (delhi) ; rampyari devi saraogi v. cit [1968] 67 itr 84 (sc .....

Rajasthan State Agricultural Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2007)106TTJ(JP.)1109

..... regard remained that till asst. yr. 2002-03 the applicant was under this belief that the applicant was exempt under section 10(20) of the act i.e. prior to amendment by finance act, 2002. the explanation was introduced to section 10(20) of the act w.e.f. 1st april, 2003 i.e.asst. yr. 2003-04. thereafter the decision dt. 14th march, ..... constitution i.e. 1974 till date. the it authorities treated the board and agricultural marketing samitees as local authority and its income exempt under section 10(20) of the act. an explanation has been added by the finance act, 2002 to take effect from 1st april, 2003 i.e. with effect from the asst. yr. 2003-04. the it department is ..... was under the bona fide belief that the income in the case of assessee is not taxable under section 10(20) of the act as the board was exempted of the income-tax liability under section 10(20) of the it act prior to amendment vide finance act, 2002.the department also did not issue any notice till asst. yr. 2002-03 to the .....

Reliance Trading Corporation Vs. Ito

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2001)73TTJ(JP.)851

..... authorities below. the issue related to assessment year 1996-97, an year which came for consideration, after the insertion of the explanation (baa) in section 80hhc by the finance (no. 2) act, 1991, with effect from 1-4-1992, which explanation is not applicable to assessment year 1989-90, the year under appeal before us. we ..... has erred in directing the assessing officer to reduce the profits of business by the amount representing interest receipt for the purpose of computing deduction under section 80hhc of the act. the finding of the nexus by the tribunal essentially shows that the income from interest was in the nature of business income and not as ..... a further finding that the interest income of the appellant was not even its income from business and the same is under challenge before us.section 14 of the income tax act, 1961, specifies distinct heads of income indicating the sources which are mutually exclusive and income derived from different sources falling under the specified heads .....

Arvind Bhartiya Vidhyalya Samiti Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2008)115TTJ(JP.)351

..... )(vi) are relevant. firstly we refer the same. the provisions contained under section 10(23c)(vi) of the act are, similar and analogous to those contained under section 10(22) of the act, which has now been omitted w.e.f. asst. yr. 1999-2000 by the finance act, 1998. for a better appreciation, both the provisions are reproduced hereunder in ..... as per discussion in para 9 of the assessment order, the ao also gave his finding that some of the interested persons, as specified in sub-section (3) of section 13 of the it act, had been conferred the benefit from the income of the samiti. therefore, as per para no. 10, the ao issued a show cause notice ..... on 31st dec, 1999. the case was selected for scrutiny.during the assessment proceedings, the ao noticed that the appellant was not having registration under section 12aa of the act nor any exemption under section 10(23c)(vi) was available. when asked, the appellant responded vide letter dt. 27th dec, 2005, mainly stating that the samiti had already .....

income-tax Officer Vs. Mannalal Nirmal Kumar

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (1985)14ITD429(JP.)

..... for such expenses, i.e., rs. 5,000. therefore, the assessee is entitled to this amount as deduction. furthermore, there is an amendment which is there in section 40a of the act vide the finance act, 1985 and the parliament has taken away even this relief to the assessee, which proves the intention of the parliament vis-a-vis for allowance of such legal ..... of rs. 6,505 including consultation fee paid to shri s.p. mehta amounting to rs. 3,950.2.1 the ito disallowed this amount under section 80vv of the income-tax act, 1961 ('the act').3. in appeal, the aac allowed it on the ground that it was in the nature of genera] consultation and hence to be allowed as one ..... . as there was a difference of opinion between the two learned brothers on this issue, the point of difference of opinion was referred to the president under section 255(4) of the act, who is pleased to nominate me as a third member. the point of difference of opinion referred by the learned members for the opinion of the third member .....

Triveni Pharma Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Reported in : (2005)92ITD125(JP.)

..... learned judicial member did not agree with the above view of the learned accountant member. he noted provisions of section 145 of the income-tax act as amended by the finance act, 1995 with effect from 1-4-1997 and quoted three sub-sections. thereafter took note of notification no. so 69(e), dated 25th january, 1996 notifying application of accounting ..... the learned cit(a) as also by the learned am in the proposed order. how else the assessee was required to challenge application of provision of section 145(3) of the act in the. circumstances discussed above and in the light of material available on record, the books of account in my view could not be rejected ..... to be resolved by one or more members of the tribunal as may be nominated by the hon'ble president, income-tax appellate tribunal in terms of section 255(4) of the act. also there is a difference in questions amongst the members. accordingly, the following questions of difference are referred: question per shri b.r. jain, accountant .....

Mewar Motors Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

..... tax liability of rs. 10,29,293 which was paid before the due date in view of the provisions of s. 43b, as it stood before the amendment by the finance act, 1987, cannot be upheld. in our view, the order of the ao allowing this claim of unpaid sales-tax liability of the assessee was not erroneous and prejudicial to ..... which was outstanding as on 31st march, 1987, but paid on 31st july, 1987, in total disregard of the provisions of s. 43b as it stood before the amendment by finance act, 1987, which provided disallowance of such liability.3. a show cause notice was issued on 4th aug., 1994, and was served on the assessee on 9th aug., 1994, fixing ..... (raj) (supra), (1987) 163 itr 194 and (1987) 167 itr 395 (raj) to the effect that the interest liability, as provided under s. 11b of the rajasthan sales-tax act, 1954, is an allowable expenditure, is well established principle. however, we find that the above decisions were rendered before introduction of s. 43b.in the case reported in (1986) 160 .....