← All Phrases

“Section 30(1)(iii)”

Section References (mined)Section 30Section 30(1)(iii)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 30(1)(iii) is Lord Thankerton in Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand (6 ITR 636), cited in 44 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 30(1)(iii)

Lord Thankerton in Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand
6 ITR 636 · 1938 · Reported
44
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business is deductible, even if it is unremunerative or does not yield an immediate profit. The absence of a corresponding receipt does not negate the deductibility of such an expense.

153C of the Act. (iii) CIT v. Sohan Lal Sewa Ram Jaggi
222 CTR 412 · 2009 · High Court
11
citing judgments

An assessee cannot challenge the jurisdiction of an assessing officer after the expiry of one month from the date of service of notice, unless the objection is raised within 30 days of the notice under section 124(3)(a).

Judgments citing Section 30(1)(iii)

M/S. Vidhata Associates, Gandhinagar vs. The Pr. CIT, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 419/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mehuk K. Patel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 30(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(iii)

going through the several issues for which the assessment proceedings were initiated, we observe that the issue of proportionate disallowance of interest under Section 30(1)(iii) of the Act was clearly not part of the limited scrutiny assessment. In the case of Sahita Construction Company Vs. Pr.CIT (ITAT Indore