COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, KERALA vs. M/S. TRAVANCORE SUGARS & CHEMICALS LTD

The appeal stands disposed of in

Bench: The Expiry Of The Relevant Previous Year. On 30.04.1993, The Assessing Officer Completed The Assessment For The Year 1990-1991 & Inter Alia Confirmed Disallowance Of The Vend Fee. Against This, The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Who, By His Order Dated 24.05.1993, Deleted The Disallowance Under Section 43B & Allowed The Appeal Of The Respondent-Assessee. Aggrieved By The Said Order, The Revenue Preferred An C. A. No. 2558/ 2005 1

disallowance under S. 43B of the I.T. Act in respect of the vend fee of Rs. 22,87,512/- outstanding as a liability payable to the Government of Kerala as on the last day of the accounting year?” Section 43B of the Income Tax Act allows certain deductions only to be on actual payment. Section 43B reads as follows

JEYAR CONSULTANT & INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,MADRAS

disallowed the deduction claim of the assessee under Section 80HHC of the Act on the ground that the 'profits of the business computed under Section 80HHC indicated a negative figure'. This view was accepted by all the Courts and affirmed by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. Before this Court, submission of the appellant/assessee was that a reading of Section

HERO CYCLES (P) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)

Appeal is allowed, thereby setting aside the order of the

Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). The aforesaid deduction was disallowed by the Assessing Officer vide his Assesssment Order dated 26.03.1991 on the following two points: - (1) The assessee had advanced a sum of Rs.1,16,26,128/- to its subsidiary company known as M/s. Hero Fibers Limited and this advance

M/S. B.P.L. LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALICUT

Section 11AC as well as further penalty of Rs.1 lakh. 6) Thereafter, the appellant filed an appeal before the CEGAT, Madras (now Chennai) against the order of the Commissioner Civil Appeal Nos. 5523 & 6037 of 2004 Page 4 of 19 Page 5 JUDGMENT mainly impressing upon the CEGAT that the Commissioner in the impugned order had relied upon extraneous grounds

M/S MERIDIAN INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMR.OF CENTRAL EXCISE

4. However, the Central Board of Excise & Customs, reviewed the order of the Commissioner of Central Excise in Order-in-Original No.32/2002-Commr. dated 21.06.2002 and directed the Commissioner to present an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal exercising power under Section 35B of the Act. The Commissioner of Central Excise preferred the appeal as directed by the Central Board of Excise