Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance no 2 act 2009 chapter iii direct taxes Court: kolkata Page 87 of about 2,866 results (0.381 seconds)

Rai Bahadur G.V. Swaika Estates Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. the Chief Commi ...

Court : Kolkata

..... pertinent to mention here that the parties did not file form 37ee under chapter xxa of the income tax act. form 37-i was filed jointly by both the parties viz., the transferor & the transferee, m/s.karnani finance enterprises limited, the purchaser, has clearly confirmed again by his letter dated 22nd june 2001 in cours.of ..... judge accepted the said decision. the question of restrospectivity here is a mixed question of fact and law. here the parties no doubt on paper reached the agreement on 22nd october, 1984 almost 2 years before the aforesaid chapter came into force but if a party sits on the agreement and does not want to enforce ..... courts that as the said chapter has no retrospective operation any action taken pursuant thereto intending to give retrospective effect is nullity and without jurisdiction. the authorities cited by mr.gupta are as follows:- 1. 252 itr 24.(bhatia apartments private limited -vs.- union of india)(delhi high court).2. 278 itr 35.(annapurna agencies private limited .....

Arvind and Company Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Xv Kolkata.

Court : Kolkata

..... amount, rent or licence fee) received by an assessee from leasing or letting out of assets would fall under the head profits and gains of business or profession ; (2) it is a mixed question of law and fact and has to be determined from the point of view of a businessman in that business on the facts and in ..... in the circumstances of the case and on a true and proper interpretation of section 24(b) of the income tax act, 1961 was justified in law in disallowing the interest paid to the partners on the ground that there is no specific provision for claiming interest paid to the partners on their capital against the income from house property ..... ?. ii].whether the amount of interest paid to the partners from the partnership firm on account of interest though being assessed to .....

Commissioner of Income Tax, Asansol Vs. Kumud Ranjan Banerjee

Court : Kolkata

..... huge stakes in the case and not applying the ratio laid down by the hon'ble supreme court in the case of cit versus west bengal infrastructure development finance corporation ltd.334 itr269(sc). we are considering the present appeal only on question no.(i).by the order impugned, the tribunal did not admit the appeal before it on the ground that ..... delay is of 115 days. the causes shown in the application are accepted as sufficient. g.a.no.2753 of 2014 is allowed. the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. g.a.no.2755 of 2014: this appeal under section 260a of the income tax act, 1961 is directed against the order dated december 10, 2013 passed by income tax appellate tribunal ..... c bench, kolkata in ita no.1503/kol/2011 on the following questions: i) whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned tribunal has erred in law in not admitting the appeal of the revenue on the ground of delay of 31 days and in refusing to condone the delay ?. ii) the whether on the facts .....

Commissioner of Income Tax, Koliii Vs. Shree Balaji Glass Manufacturin ...

Court : Kolkata

..... the references to substantial made in the said section or other sections of the act which may be in a different context the legislative intent interpreted by the cit(a) being not in violation of any statutory restriction and not at variance of any ..... at any time during the previous year beneficially entitled to not less than 20% of the income of such concern. inviting attention to section 13(3)(b) of it act it was submitted that the word substantial contribution has been defined to mean upto the end of the relevant previous year exceeding rs.50,000/-. however, without getting into ..... of accumulated profits the payment does not partake the character of deemed dividend, as would appear from section 2(22)(e).from a plain reading thereof for which no elaboration is required. the question still remains as to whether pushpak commercial finance pvt.ltd.can be said to have lent a sum of rs.18,36,454/- from out of .....

isg Traders Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, West

Court : Kolkata

..... new section retrospectively was to set the existing controversy on this issue at rest and not to unsettle the cases by raising the issue afresh. "23.2 through the finance act, 2002, a proviso to section 14a has been inserted so as to clarify that the assessing officer shall not reassess the cases under section 147 or ..... the interest expenditure incurred in respect of money borrowed for the purposed of the appellant's business was deductible under section 36(1) (iii) of the act and no part thereof could be apportioned as relatable to the dividend income. h) being dissatisfied, the assessing officer preferred an appeal before the tribunal below and the ..... proceedings, the assessing officer required the appellant to furnish the breakup of the cost relating to earning of the dividend when it was explained by the appellant that no cost could be apportioned to the dividend income. the assessing officer, however, sought to work out pro-rata interest expenditure as relatable to earning of dividend. .....

Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Gokulchand Bangur

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Reported in : (1984)8ITD738(Kol.)

..... tax assessment is completed, the liability to income-tax has to be computed on the basis of the return filed and the rates of tax stipulated in the relevant finance act. but if the income-tax assessments, in question, have already been completed, the tax quantified through such assessment orders would be the debt. this logic has been ..... order during the pendency of an appeal. now, if the ultimate liability so determined is to be considered for the purpose of allowing a deduction, there is apparently no reason why if the liability is reduced or increased, the deduction shall not vary. in the present case, the refunds were determined even before the assessment orders ..... liabilities may not have been quantified on the relevant valuation dates, the assessees are entitled to claim them as a deduction, if not otherwise, specifically debarred by section 2(m). for example, there is the decision of the calcutta high court in cwt v. bansidhar poddar [1978] 112 itr 957 in which the assessee had made .....

Commissioner of Income Tax, Kolkata Ii Vs. Pilani Investment and Indu ...

Court : Kolkata

..... (a) and held as follows: 5. heard the rival contested submissions, went through the record. it is a fact that the assessee has acted bonafidely in this case. there is no condition of the provision of section 271(1)(c) with regard to the imposition of penalty for concealment. neither there is furnishing of inaccurate particulars ..... of position taken in respect of treatment of interest on income tax refund as contingent in nature. the said disclosure substantiates the bonafide belief of the appellant. (ii) the observation of the assessing officer that penalty provisions are attracted irrespective of the fact whether an addition is based on bonafide or malafide belief cannot be accepted ..... . it was tried to be argued that the falsehood in accounts can take either of the two forms.(i) an item of receipt may be suppressed fraudulently; (ii) an item of expenditure may be falsely (or in an exaggerated amount) claimed, and both types attempt to reduce the taxable income and, therefore, both types .....

M/S. Singlo (India) Tea Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central I ...

Court : Kolkata

..... . he, in support of his submission, relied upon the judgment of this court in the case of goodricke group ltd. versus commissioner of income tax ii, kolkata, [ita no.651 of 2004, vide order dated 19th may 2011]., wherein the following view was taken:- we find that the tribunal below erroneously held that the deduction ..... clause (b) as aforesaid relates to the expression business of growing and manufacturing tea as appearing in the beginning of subsection (1) of section 33ab of the act. in cit versus mahavir plantations ltd.reported in (2004) 269 itr552 the following issue arose for consideration:- whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... in section 28 shall be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in sections 30 to 43d. therefore section 33ab is a part of the provisions under the act which deals with computation of income under the head profits and gains of business or profession . hence according to williamson financial (supra) apportionment prescribed by rule .....

Commissioner of Income Tax, Koikataiii, Kolkata Vs. M/S. Cellice Devel ...

Court : Kolkata

..... used by the assessee for financing its stock, we are of the opinion that processing charges incurred for raising such loan was an allowable expenditure. we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of learned cit (appeals).ground no.3 of the revenue stands dismissed. we find that so far as question nos.2 and 3 the tribunal had ..... payment of advance was not for acquisition of fixed assets but only for acquiring stock-in-trade, assessee was entitled for deduction under section 36(1)[iii].of the act. we are, therefore, of the opinion that learned c.i.t.(appeals) was justified in deleting the addition made by the assessing officer . so far as the question ..... in deleting additions made by the assessing officer on account of treating the processing fees for loan as non allowable expenditure under section 37 of the income tax act, 1961?. heard mr.ranjan sinha, learned advocate for the appellant and mr.j.p.khaitan, learned senior advocate for the respondent/assessee. so far as the question .....

Ms. Enfield Industries Ltd. Vs. Dy. Cit

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

..... erroneous.as a matter of fact, these two provisions, i.e. sub-section (2) of section 158bfa and the explanation to section 271(1)(c) as inserted by the finance act, 1964, have nothing in common. most importantly, unlike the latter, there is no presumption for concealment in the former. so onus would lie heavily with the department ..... to prove concealment for the purpose of imposing penalty under section 158bfa(2), which is lacking in this case.6.11. ..... as undisclosed income of the appellant, which would qualify for levy of penalty under sub-section (2) of section 158bfa of the act. (viii) that the assessing officer stated that this addition was not challenged by the assessee inasmuch as no appeal was filed against the assessment, meaning thereby, that the amount of rs. 21,50,850 .....