COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KERALA, ERNAKULAM vs. TRAVANCORE SUGAR & CHEMICALS LTD

disallowed by the Income Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but was allowed by the Tribunal holding that the payment was an expenditure made in order to earn profits of the business and not an expenditure paid out of the earned profits. At the instance of the respondent, the Tribunal referred the following question of law to the High

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM

Bench: This Court & On Leave Being Granted, Civil Appeals Have Been Registered. 3.

disallowances. He submits that for the assessment year 1993–1994, the appellant had maintained complete set of books of account, audited profit and loss account and balance sheet which were duly filed before the assessing officer. Following assessment proceedings, assessing officer passed the assessment order for the assessment year 1993 – 1994 on 27.01.1994 under Section

VODAFONE IDEA LTD(EARLIER KNOWN AS VODAFONE MOBILE SERVICES LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 26 (2)

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

270/- 2010-11 Corporate Tax Assessment u/s 143(3) 3,36,22,76,980/- 60,00,00,000/- 2,76,22,76,980/- 2010-11 Corporate Tax Assessment u/s 143(3) 1,65,14,76,430/- 1,65,14,76,430/- 2011-12 Corporate Tax Assessment u/s 143(3) 2,11,61,29,711/- 2,11,61,29,411/- Thereafter

SHIV RAJ GUPTA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI IV

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

270/- has since been paid by the SWC group to Shri Gupta, as a result of which Shri Gupta has irrevocably handed over physical possession, management and control of the said brewery and distillery of CDBL to a representative of the SWC group on 10.02.1994. Among the things to be done under the MoU, it was made clear that

SWADESHI POLYTEX LTD. vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

section 35L of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as ’the Act’) against the judgment and order dated 18th August, 1988 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter re- ferred to as ’the tribunal’). The appellant was at all relevant times engaged in the manufacture, inter alia, of polyester fibre (man-made

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,MYSORETRAVANCORE-COCHIN AND vs. THE INDO MERCANTILE BANK, LIMITED(and connected appeal)

In the result the appeals fail and are dismissed with costs

disallowing a deduction of the losses in British India and in States other than Travancore State against profits made in Travancore State: Rhondda Urban Council v. Taff Vale Railway (1) and Harrison v. Ward (2). It may be mentioned that in the majority of cases decided in India the proviso to s. 24(1) of the Indian Act has been

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, NEW DELHI vs. ANANT RAO B. KAMAT

In the result, we agree with the High Court that answer to

disallowed the grossing up at the Indianbut allowed at the State rate, defined by paragraph 3 (v)of the Conclusion Order.The Appellate Assistant Commissioner upheld the order of, the Income Tax Officer, but the assesse succeeded before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. On the application of the Commissioner of Income Tax, the tribunalreferred the following question to the High Court

EASTERN INVESTMENTS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,WEST BENGAL

270 P.C. (2) 1937 I.T.R. 202 P.C. (3) 6 Tax Cases 501. (4) 1915 A.C. 433. (5) 1926 A.C. 205 at 221 and 235. (6) 1912 A.C. 118. 599 One of the points which weighed with the Incometax Appellate Tribunal and the High Court was that though the conversion did not in any way disturb the holding of the investments

DHARAMVIR DHIR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,BIHAR & ORISSA

270, British Sugar Manufacturers Ltd. v. Harris, [1937] 21 T.C. 528, referred to. JUDGMENT: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeals Nos. 448 and 449 of 1959. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated February 12, 1958, of the Patna High Court in Misc. Judicial Cases Nos. 679 and 680 of 1955. A. V. Viswanatha Sastri and Naunit