Click Here For Best Books On Taxation & Law. Upto 60% Off On Select Titles. Free Shipping & Pay On Delivery!
 

Click Here To Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter

This section is now closed. Click here for new judgements

Home › All Judgements › CIT vs. Lazor Syntex & CIT vs. Akshay Textiles Trading (Bombay High Court)

CIT vs. Lazor Syntex & CIT vs. Akshay Textiles Trading (Bombay High Court)

Posted on by editor
COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: April 9, 2008 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:


(i) In McDowell 154 ITR 148, the Court nowhere said that every action or inaction on the part of the tax payer which results in reduction of tax liability to which he may be subjected to in the future, is to be viewed with suspicion and be treated as a device for avoidance of tax irrespective of legitimacy or genuineness of the act.

(ii) The effect of Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 is that an act which is otherwise valid in law cannot be treated as non est merely on the basis of some underlying motive supposedly resulting in some economic detriment or prejudice to the national interests, as perceived by the AO.

Related Judgements

  1. CIT vs. Silver Streak (Delhi High Court) 

    High Court deprectaes the practice of the department in mechnaically filing frivolous appeals. Observes that it causes inconvenience and wastes the time of the Court and results in sidelining of important issues. It accordingly imposes costs of Rs. 10,000 on … CIT vs. Silver Streak (Delhi High Court)…
  2. CIT vs. Saumya Leasing (Bombay High Court) 

    Deduction under section 80M can be claimed even in respect of the interim dividend declared for the succeeding financial year before the due date.
  3. CIT vs. Nicholas Piramal (Bombay High Court) 

    As s. 192 requires the employer to deduct tax on the “estimated income” of the employee, the test is whether he acted in a bona fide and honest manner. Where the employer allowed the employees deduction under sections 10(5) and 10(14) only on the basis of declarations filed by…
  4. Rohitsava Chand vs. CIT (Delhi High Court) 

    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 … Rohitsava Chand vs. CIT (Delhi High Court)…
  5. CIT vs. Eicher Ltd (Delhi High Court) 

    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…
0 comments on “CIT vs. Lazor Syntex & CIT vs. Akshay Textiles Trading (Bombay High Court)”
1 Pings/Trackbacks for "CIT vs. Lazor Syntex & CIT vs. Akshay Textiles Trading (Bombay High Court)"
  1. archives » Blog Archive » Shiv Kant Jha vs. UOI (Supreme Court) says:
    August 7, 2008 at 10:41 am

    […] the law on whether Azadi Bachao Andolan can prevail against McDowell vs. CTO 159 ITR 148 (SC), see CIT vs. Lazor Syntex & CIT vs. Akshay Textiles Trading (Bombay High Court). Posted in All Judgements, Supreme Court […]