Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter:

Emptee Poly-Yarn (Bombay High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 31, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Meaning of the terms “manufacture”, “production” and “process”. The process applied to POY either for the purpose of texturising or twisting constitutes manufacture as the article produced is recognised in the trade as distinct commodity pursuant to the process it undergoes and which amounts to manufacture.

CIT vs. Eicher Ltd (Delhi High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 26, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Non-compete compensation paid to an employee for an indefinite period is business expenditure and not capital expenditure as no capital asset or benefit of enduring benefit came into existence. While the lenght of the period of the covenant is important, it is not decisive. What is more important is the purpose of the payment and its intended object and effect.

Rohitsava Chand vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 26, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Non-compete compensation received by an employee-director for agreeing not to carry on any business activity relating to software development for a period of 18 months constitutes a capital receipt as it is for loss of a source of income. See

Saraya Industries vs. UOI (Delhi High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: March 25, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Sections 153A and 153C are not unconstitutional either on the ground of discrimination or on the ground that they allegedly exclude the principles of natural justice.

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

Peninsula Land vs. CIT (Bombay High 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:

An order passed by the AO to give consequential effect to an appeallate order of an earlier year is not an order passed under section 154 and consequently the time limit of section 154(7) does not apply.

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

CIT vs. Pamwi Tissues (Bombay High Court)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 27, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

The deletion of the second proviso to s. 43B by the Finance Act 2003 wef 1.4.2004 cannot be treated as a retrospective amendment and contributions towards PF beyond the period stipulated in s 36(1)(va) are not allowable deductions. Note: The

Narang Overseas vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai 5 Member Special Bench)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: February 26, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

(i) The judgement of the SC in Mariappa Gounder vs. CIT 232 ITR 2 does not decide whether mesne profits received against wrongful possession of property is in the nature of revenue receipt or capital receipt. It merely decides the

Top