Category: Supreme Court

Archive for the ‘Supreme Court’ Category


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 …

State vs. Abraham Kurian (Supreme Court) Read More »

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 …

DCIT vs. Core Health Care (Supreme Court) Read More »

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 …

JCIT vs. United Phosphorus (Supreme Court) Read More »

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) …

DCIT vs. Gujarat Alkalies (Supreme Court) Read More »

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 …

Mangat Ram vs. State (Supreme Court) Read More »

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

Cash in bank is conceptually different from cash in hand. It is not permissible for the Revenue to withdraw money from the attached bank accounts. However, as the order u/s 132B was not challenged, no relief given. Directions given for …

K.C.C. Software Ltd vs. DIT (Inv.) (Supreme Court) Read More »

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: January 23, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

Where the assessee had led satisfactory evidence that its business was that of a commission agent and not a trader and 10-11 years had passed, the assessee could not be held responsible for non-appearance of five traders to whom summons …

M/s Ahmed Anis vs. CIT (Supreme Court) Read More »

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: January 18, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

S. 158BB has to be read with the relevant Finance Act and the surcharge prescribed therein is applicable to a block assessment. The Proviso to s. 113 of the Act, though inserted by the Finance Act 2002 with effect from …

CIT vs. Suresh N. Gupta (Supreme Court) Read More »

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: January 9, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE: Click here to view full post with file download link
CITATION:

(i) A stock option which is subject to a ‘lock-in’ is not a chargeable perquisite u/s 17(2) on the date of grant, vesting or exercise. The benfit is purely notional. (ii) s. 17(2)(iiia) inserted w.e.f 1.4.2000 is not clarificatory; (iii) …

Infosys Technologies (Supreme Court) Read More »