Month: October 2019

Archive for October, 2019


CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 5) (2019) 416 ITR 571 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings-Two manufacturing units-Deduction at 30% of eligible business–Not on total income.[S. 80AB]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 80IA : Industrial undertakings–Interest on bank deposits do not constitute business income for claiming deduction.

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 80HHC : Export business-Deduction is allowable on the basis of finally assessed income.

CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 263 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 73 : Losses in speculation business-Non-Banking financial Institution advancing Loans and making investments-Not speculative transactions-Loss is allowable to be set off. [S. 28(i)]

CIT v. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. (2019) 416 ITR 263 (Delhi)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Transactions found to be genuine—Deletion of addition is held to be justified.

CIT v. Malayil Bankers. (2019) 416 ITR 322 /( 2020) 185 DTR 347/ 314 CTR 568(Ker.)(HC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-No explanation was furnished–Civil proceedings would not regulate the assessment under the Income-tax Act-Tribunal remanding the matter is held to be erroneous-Addition as cash credit is valid. [S. 254(1)]

Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 539 (Ker.)(HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 43A : Rate of exchange-Foreign currency-Actual cost-Gains earned on cancellation of forward contracts-Capital in nature and liable to be capitalized towards cost of machinery. [S. 43(1)]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 4) (2019) 416 ITR 564 (Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Contribution to Employees welfare Trust–Allowable as business expenditure. [S. 36(1)(iv), 36(1)(v), 40A(9)]

CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No .2) (2019) 416 ITR 546 (Ker.) (HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 3) (2019) 416 ITR 554 (Ker.) (HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Variation in quality or defective goods–No addition can be made-General expenses–Reduction of expenses–Rent to other companies–Same management– Commission paid to investment companies–Amount cannot be assessed in the hands of the assessee.[S. 4]

Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) v. ACIT (2019) 416 ITR 539 (Ker.)(HC) CIT v. Apollo Tyres Ltd. (No. 2) (2019) 219 ITR 546 ( Ker.)(HC)

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Royalty-Disallowance of expenses to extent not attributable to previous year relevant to Assessment year is held to be proper–Entitle to deduction for the period in question.