Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2009 2009 (11) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 401 to 420 of 735 Records

• 2009 (11) TMI 617
  

  Replacement of machinery - capital or revenue expenditure - whether, on facts and circumstances of this case, the respondent [assessee herein] was not entitled to deduction in view of the law laid down in the judgement of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Mangayarkarasi Mills Private Limited, [2009 -TMI - 34189 - SUPREME COURT ] - Matter remanded back for de novo consideration.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 615
  

  Stay - 100% EOU - Disallowance of Cenvat credit - the dispute is that there was no proper document evidencing payment of service tax by the appellants - This amount of credit is still lying in the Cenvat account of the appellants - Held that: - service tax on warehousing of export cargo of the appellants - Condition of pre deposit waived.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 613
  

  Demand - Rectification of mistakes - assessee seeks to re-appreciate the evidence available on record - One piece of evidence considered by the Bench is the confessional statement given by Shri Ramesh K. Shah for the entire period. Another piece of evidence consists of purchase orders placed on the assessee by certain parties - under Section 35C(2) of the Act, it is not open to us to enter into such re-appreciation of evidence - One need not dive into the facts and evidence of the case to identify the mistake, in the present case, the assessee has taken pains through their counsel to cull out what he calls apparent mistake, in the final order of the Tribunal - Appeal is dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 610
  

  Cenvat credit - Change in the name of company - Credit available before change in the name utilized after change in name - Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - The objection of the department is that the order of the Assistant Commissioner was in favour of SVASRML and not the assessee SVSPL - Held that: only the name of the company changed from SVASRML to SVSPL - The constitution of the company has not changed - the transfer of credit from SVASRML to SVSPL is permissible in law - Decided in favor of the assessee

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 608
  

  Application for stay - Waiver of pre-deposit - No speaking order - As the petitioner did not communicate compliance with the conditions of the stay order but filed a petition requesting for reconsideration and modification of the aforesaid stay order, the Commissioner dismissed the main appeal on the ground of non-compliance with the requirement of Section 35F of the Central Excise Act 1944 - Principle of natural justice requires that there should be proper application of mind in taking a decision which cannot be possible without giving reason - The writ petition is accordingly disposed of

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 606
  

  Deduction u/s 80HHC - Failure to claim relief in the return despite positive income - claim was made during reassessment proceeding - assessee company which is an undertaking of the Government of Tamil Nadu is engaged in manufacture and export of granites - AO submission is that since ssessee has not made any claim in the return of income about deduction under s. 80HHC, despite having positive income - CIT(A) held that assessee would be entitled to deduction under s. 80HHC and directed the AO to ascertain the availability of profits of business eligible for deduction - High Court in the case of CIT vs. Valli Cotton Traders (P) Ltd. (2006 -TMI - 3392 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) - wherein it was held that the spirit behind sub-ss. (5) and (9) of s. 139 r/w s. 80HHC is that the assessee should be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to claim the benefit as available under the statute and any denial on technical ground is not justified - Decided in favor of the assessee by way of direction to AO

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 602
  

  Demand with penalty - principle of natural justice - It is well settled principle of law that merely because principle of natural justice was not complied with, that itself cannot be a ground to grant whole exemption from the liability to pay duty by the assessee - the impugned order cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority with the direction to furnish the required copies of the documents to the assessee and give him opportunity of being heard in the matter and thereafter pass an appropriate order afresh in accordance with the provisions of law - matter remanded back.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 598
  

  Cenvat credit - Rule 22 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 - The Superintendent’s letter contained a request for furnishing details of the legal heirs of Dr. Badlani. Accordingly, Shri Dinesh Badlani furnished the details to the Superintendent - Under Rule 22, the burden is on the applicant to establish that the persons who are claimed to be the legal heirs of the deceased are actually so - The correct addresses shall be given within a fortnight and the Registry shall issue notices thereafter within another fortnight - Application is allowed

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 595
  

  Waiver of pre-deposit - Application for restoration - Condonation of delay - appellant challenged the High Court’s Order before the Hon’ble Supreme Court - Supreme Court on 18-12-2008 ordered thus : “we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed. However, the time for deposit is extended by eight weeks - Where the Hon’ble Supreme Court stipulated a period for deposit of an amount by the appellant, they ought to have complied with the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court - Where the appellant made the deposit belatedly, it was open to them to move the Hon’ble Supreme Court for condonation of the delay - application is dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 594
  

  Set off of duty paid - Notification No. 355/86-C.E., dated 24-6-1986 - unjust-enrichment - Since the order of the Tribunal is very clear and the direction was only to verify the correctness of the amount claimed the claim could not have been rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment - Appeal is allowed

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 589
  

  Addition - Under section 68 - Unexplained credit entries may or may not have nexus with the trading results, as assessed. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleted the additions in respect of trading results after giving the benefit of telescoping - It will, thus, be a question of fact in each case whether addition on account of unexplained credit entries was justified, in spite of addition made to the declared trading results - The judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the assessee is on a different fact situation and cannot be read as laying down any norm of universal application that once addition was made in the trading results, no addition could ever be made on account of unexplained credit entries - The appeal is dismissed.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 586
  

  Exemption - Principle of mutuality and no man can trade with himself - The very question came up for consideration before this court in a batch of cases rendered in Madras Gymkhana Club v. Deputy CIT reported in (2009 -TMI - 34308 - MADRAS HIGH COURT) - The Division Bench, after a detailed analysis of the question involved took the view that investment of surplus funds by such clubs with some of the member banks and institutions in the form of fixed deposits and securities not with a definite idea of using the same in any specific projects for further development of the infrastructural facilities of the clubs failed to satisfy the concept of mutuality and therefore the benefit of exemption cannot be extended to the interest income - Hence, the question of law has been answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 585
  

  Reassessment - Book profit - MAT - claim of depreciation was disclosed – Failed to disclose material facts necessary for assessment or information regarding escape of income from assessment - reopening of assessment under section 147(a) of the Act was not valid

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 582
  

  Capital or revenue expenditure - Scrutiny - judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Secure Meters Ltd. [2008 -TMI - 32081 - HIGH COURT RAJASTHAN ) considering the various aspects has come to the conclusion that even if the debenture were to be converted into share at a later date, the expenditure incurred on such convertible debenture has to be treated as a revenue expenditure - Decided in the favour of assessee

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 581
  

  Block assessment - Survey - Since there was no response, when the third respondent called upon the petitioners to submit their objections to the proposal to assess the income, the petitioners sent objections dt. 21st Feb., 2007 denying the assessment as an AOP and a further letter dt. 21st March, 2007 seeking copy of the block assessment order, if any, passed against the AOP, so that the petitioners could take recourse to the Tribunal. Since there was no response therein, the petitioners believed that there were no proceedings.On receipt of the notice, it is open to the assessees to take such contentions as they deem fit, including on the question of recovery. The recovery proceedings, hence, shall be kept in abeyance till the orders of assessment are served.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 578
  

  Penalties under s. 271D and s. 271E - The AO initiated penalty proceedings under s. 271D on the ground that there was a contravention of s. 269SS of the Act in as much as the assessee took a loan in cash in a sum exceeding Rs. 20,000 - The assessee was given the dealership of IOC gas agency in the name and style of M/s Tina Gas Service in the reserved category, that in order to augment the capital he accepted Rs. 8 lakhs from one Praful Patel who was the proprietor of Mahindra Traders as capital for the partnership which was proposed to be constituted under a MoU.

  The definition of a loan or deposit in s. 269SS merely says that it means a loan or deposit of money [as per Expln. (iii)] - Under Expln. (iii) of s. 269T it is defined as money which is repayable after notice or after a period and in the case of a person other than a company includes loan or deposit of any nature - The popular meaning of a loan or deposit involves the idea of charging interest and in ordinary parlance it would be difficult to conceive of a loan or deposit of money without any provision for payment of interest - In the case of a capital contribution to a partnership firm, there can be a contract amongst the partners that the capital contribution would carry interest - In the present case however it was provided that if the partnership does not materialise, the money would be returned without interest - The idea of a loan or deposit within the meaning of ss. 269SS and 269T is therefore ruled out - the assessee bona fide thought that he could take the capital contribution in cash since it did not carry any interest and cannot be considered as a loan or deposit - Thus, there was bona fide belief which also constitutes reasonable cause within the meaning of s. 273B.

  No motive of evade tax - Praful Patel was already assessed to tax. Though he advanced the monies to the assessee in cash, the assessee immediately deposited the same in his bank account - Thus, the amount was brought on record and into the accounts of the assessee -The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has held in the judgment cited supra, on behalf of the assessee, that it is necessary to show the motive to evade tax in order to justify the levy of penalty under s. 271D and s. 271E - Hence, cancel the penalties of Rs. 8 lakhs each imposed under ss. 271D and 271E and allow the appeals of the assessee with no order as to costs.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 576
  

  Industrial undertaking – special deduction – Duty drawback - profits derived by way of such incentives do not fall within the expression `profits derived from industrial undertaking' in section 80-IB as held in Liberty India v. CIT (2009 -TMI - 34471 - SUPREME COURT) – Appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 574
  

  MRP base valuation - Under section 4A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - There is no evidence to indicate that the three soap cakes contained in a pack can be sold separately - As such, find no substance in the department’s appeal wanting to assess the soap cakes on the basis of price for individual soap cakes - Hence the impugned order is upheld and the appeal is rejected.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 572
  

  Searched - Limitation - Block assessment - The notice under section 158BC was issued to the assessee on July 27, 1999 - After noticing that the warrant was not issued in the name of the assessee, a fresh notice under section 158BC read with section 158BD was issued on the assessee on February 7, 2001 - The assessee filed the block return on January 29, 2003 admitting "nil" undisclosed income - The assessment was made on February 27, 2003 - Held that: the assessment made against the assessee is beyond the period prescribed under section 158BE(2)(b)- appeal dismissed - Decided in favor of assessee.

  ---

• 2009 (11) TMI 570
  
  The Calcutta High Court set aside an order dated August 21, 2009, as the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade who passed the order had not heard the matter. The Court directed the Joint Director General to hear the matter and pass a reasoned order within four weeks. WP No. 1005 of 2009 was disposed of without costs.

  ---

1 ....171819202122232425........ 37