JT.COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,SURAT vs. SAHELI LEASING & INDUSTRIES LTD

Appeals stand allowed as mentioned hereinabove but with

disallowed out of depreciation. Penalty proceedings under Section 271 (1) (c) of the Act were initiated. In response to the show cause notice issued by the Revenue, Assessee filed its reply denying the allegations and contending that no penalty can be imposed on it, when returned income was NIL. 15. Penalty was sought to be imposed in respect

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. M/S. GENERAL INSURANCE CORPN.OF INDIA

Disallowance of Rs. 1,04,28,500/- in respect of stamp duty and registration fees incurred in connection with the increase in the authorized share capital were bifurcated by the CIT (Appeals) into two categories, one relating to the increase in authorized share capital from Rs. 75 crores to Rs. 250 crores and second relating to issue of bonus shares

M/S. K.P. MADHUSUDHANAN vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, COCHIN, KERALA

disallowed as a result of the rejection of any explanation offered by such person, if such explanation is bonafide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him. In Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. P.M. Shah (203 ITR 792) the High Court at Bombay observed that

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI vs. M/S. BILAHARI INVESTMENT P. LTD

Appeals are dismissed

disallowed the expenditure of Rs. 24,809 on the ground that the amount was not actually spent. The assessee ultimately succeeded in the Supreme Court. It was held by the Supreme Court that the expression "Profits or Gains" in Section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 should be understood in its commercial sense and there

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Section 12AA(1) of the IT Act, on 18.05.1979 and is engaged in the activity of promotion of the export of all kind of ready-made garments, knitwear, and garments made of leather, jute and hemp. It does not per se engage in any activity for profit, and its mandate is to ensure that Indian apparel manufacturers, are given forums

UNISON ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIOINER, CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: Dispatch From Their Factory & Stickers Bearing Uts/Tsn Were Being Affixed & These Sticker Bear The Words “Checked Sl. No. Do Not Remove This Sticker” & That The 2

disallowed the benefit of small scale exemption notification. It was submitted that the words UTS and TSN are not brand names but are the abbreviations of the name of the marketing companies which does not amount to use of the brand name. Stand of the department was as follows: It has not been controverted by the appellants that the excisable

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI vs. M/S. AUSTRALIAN FOODS INDIA PRIVATE LTD

The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside, leaving the

disallowed. 5. Upon consideration of the explanation furnished by the assessee, the Commissioner inter-alia came to the conclusion (relevant for the controversy at hand) that unless the specified goods or the packaging in which these are sold, bear the brand name or the logo, prescribed S.S.I. exemption cannot be denied. Thus, the Commissioner held that since there was neither