Surtax - Judgment Search Results
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. International Airport Authority of India
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: (2002)173CTR(Del)69; [2002]254ITR159(Delhi); [2001]119TAXMAN702(Delhi)
256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), read with the provisions of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (in short 'the Surtax Act'):'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Indo European Machinery Co. (P.) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: [2002]254ITR560(Delhi)
been referred under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with the provisions of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench :'Whether, the order of the Tribunal that when once
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Goetze (India) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-18-2000
Reported in: [2000]246ITR602(Delhi)
computation of the capital of the company under Rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, for the said three assessment years ?'3. Referring to a decision of the Karnataka High Court
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Dalmia Dairy Industries Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN720(Delhi)
the assessed-company as computed under rules 1 2 and 3 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 was not liable to be reduced under rule 4 of the said Schedule in relation to
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Gedore Tools (India) (P) Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN568(Delhi)
Tribunal was correct in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section 8(b) of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 was merely on the basis of change of opinion on the part of the Surtax Officer
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Dalmia Ceramic Ind. Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN479(Delhi)
to be proportionately reduced by Rs. 2,111 under rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: (2002)172CTR(Del)351
court under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, read with section 9 of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the
Commissioner of Surtax (Central) Vs. Orissa Cement Ltd.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
Reported in: [2001]119TAXMAN713(Delhi)
case, the view taken by the Tribunal is right that in computing the capital for the purpose of surtax assessment, under rule 4 of the Second Schedule to the Surtax Act, the capital is not to be
Surtax Officer Vs. Andhra Valley Power Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-1985
Reported in: [1986]17ITD815(Mum)
chargeable profits as the clauses (viii) and (ix) of rule 1 of the First Schedule to companies (Profits) surtax Act, 1964 (the Surtax Act) are the gross amounts and not the net amounts. The Commissioner (Appeals) has
Commissioner of Surtax Vs. Maltex Masters Ltd.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Apr-16-1991
Reported in: [1992]193ITR336(P& H)
fall for deduction under rule 4 for computing the capital under the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 ?'The matter here is squarely covered by the judgments of this court in CIT v. Oswal
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · use +/− or drag to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free