Category: Supreme Court

Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category


Synco Industries vs. ITO (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 15, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

If the assessee has suffered a loss in one unit, the same has to be set-off against the profits of the undertaking eligible for deduction u/s 80IA etc and if the resultant figure is a loss, no deduction under Chapter VI-A is allowable;

Kerala Road Lines vs. CIT (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 15, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Interest paid for purchase of land held allowable as a deduction as the fact that the income on sale of scrap obtained on demolition of buildings on the land was offered as business income showed that the assessee had bought

CIT vs. Bilahari Investments (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 2, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

In the case of a chit fund following the ‘completed contract method of accounting’ and offering income at the end of the chit, held, approving the method: (i) Recognition/identification of income under the Act is attainable by several methods of

Munjal Sales vs. CIT (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 24, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

(i) A firm seeking to claim deduction of interest paid on capital from its partners has to first satisfy the requirements of s. 36(1)(iii) and thereafter the limits imposed by s. 40(b)(iv). The fact that the said capital is not

CCE vs. Punjab Fibres (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 19, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

In the context of s. 35 of the Excise Act, held (1) Where the statute confers on the authority concerned a limited power of condonation of delay or does not provide any such power, the authority has no power to condone delay beyond the prescribed period;

State vs. Abraham Kurian (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 16, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

(1) Tax administration is a complex subject. It consists of several aspects. The Government needs to strike a balance in the imposition of tax between collection of revenue on one hand and business-friendly approach on the other hand. (2) Exemption

DCIT vs. Core Health Care (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 12, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

(i) Interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year are deductible under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act; (ii) Interest on all moneys borrowed for the purposes of business are deductible

JCIT vs. United Phosphorus (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 12, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The question as to whether the assessee had an option in law to claim partial depreciation in respect of any block of assets is remanded to the High Court to consider in the light of Mahendra Mills 243 ITR 56

DCIT vs. Gujarat Alkalies (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 12, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Commitment charges paid in respect of borrowed moneys are allowable as a deduction u/s 37(1) of the Act. Related Judgements Infosys Technologies (Supreme Court) (i) A stock option which is subject to a ‘lock-in’ is not a chargeable perquisite u/s 17(2)

Mangat Ram vs. State (Supreme Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 8, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The Supreme Court deprectaes the practice of the High Court in disposing of matters without recording reasons. Explains that while the Supreme Court itself, being the final court, may pass orders without reasons, the High Courts and lower courts are

Top