Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-31-2014
..... the time of hearing, ld. dr supported the orders of ao in denying the deduction u/s 80ib (10) of the act in view of the amendment made by insertion of clause (d) of section 80ib (10) with effect from 1.4.2005 on the ground that aggregate ..... project approved on or after 1.4.2005 and where the approval of the project was prior to 31.3.2005, the amended provision would have no application for those projects. we observe that the hon'ble gujarat high court also placed heavily reliance on the ..... relating to assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07, the assessment years which also falls after the amendment made by insertion of clause (d) to section 80ib(10) of the act, applicable from 1.4.2005 has held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80ib ..... controvert the above contention of the assessee but reiterated that in view of the amendment made with effect from 1.4.2005 the assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s 80ib(10) of the act as it does not fulfill one of the requirements of clause (d) of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-05-2014
..... section 115jb is not applicable to the assessee-company. we, accordingly, set aside the impugned order. we are conscious, even as noted by the ld. cit, that the act has been amended by finance act, 2012, so as to include within the ambit of section 115jb, companies to which the proviso to section 211(2) of the companies ..... act, 1956 is applicable. the same, however, is applicable w.e.f. 01.04.2013. though an issue as to the said amendment being clarificatory and, thus, retrospective, could arise, the said question would stand to be answered in further appellate ..... proceedings inasmuch as the tribunal has taken a clear view in the matter on the basis of the un-amended law, and which we have adopted. in other words, even granting the possibility of a different view, the only course available to the revenue, i.e., in case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-31-2014
..... has been held by him that the "dr' and 'cr' note were self prepared to suit the convenience of the parties," appellant craves leave to add to, amend or withdraw the aforesaid ground of appeal. 2.assessee-company,engaged in the business of dealing in shares and securities, filed its return of income on 30.10.2007 declaring ..... the seller is a third party who has no interest whatsoever in the business of the appellant. 6. the learned cit (appeals) erred in applying the sale of goods act, though interpreted erroneously, in the case of the appellant without appreciating the facts of the case in the right perspective. 7. the learned cit (appeals) erred in ..... filed cross appeals. assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1.the order of the learned cit (appeals) is bad in law, ultra vires the provision of the act against the principles of natural justice and deserves to be condemned in totality. 2. the order of learned cit (appeals) has been passed with surmises, conjectures, undue haste .....
Tag this Judgment!