M/S. PUROLATOR INDIA LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, DELHI-III

Appeal is disposed of accordingly

Section 4(2) is in terms replaced by Rule 5 of the Central Excise Valuation (Determination of Price of Excisable Goods) Rules, 2000. 19 Page 20 JUDGMENT 15. Post 1973, this Court has in two of its decisions, namely, in Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Limited, 1984 (17) ELT 329 (SC), clearly held as follows:- “Trade Discounts. – Discounts

BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LTD. vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX

4) of Section 37. A similar view appears to have been expressed by the Gujarat High Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Ahmedabad Manufacturing and Calico Printing Co. Ltd., reported in (1992) 197 ITR 538; wherein it was also held that expenses incurred of the nature described in Sections 30 to 36 could not be disallowed

COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MYSORE vs. M/S. TVS MOTORS COMPANY LTD

Section 4(3)(d) of said Act as forming part of value of Excisable goods are in fact the expenses/deductions specifically disallowed

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,NEW DELHI vs. M/S ELI LILLY & COMPANY (INDIA) P.LTD

4 and 5 which are the charging sections. Sections 160 and 161 provide a machinery for collection of a charge which is imposed in general terms elsewhere and yet Sections 160 and 161 are the sections which like Section 201(1) imposes a vicarious liability on an agent to be assessed in respect of the income of the principal

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE vs. DAI ICHI KARKARIA LTD

The appeals are dismissed

Section 4 of the Act only and MODVAT credit has no direct impact on the assessable value. We shall examine the Rules pertaining to the MODVAT scheme ourselves but we note the finding of the Tribunal that MODVAT credit results in the reduction of the cost of the excisable product to the extent of the credit. The learned Attorney General

THE CITIZEN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD., REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR G.RANGA RAO. HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed reportable

4) of the Act. In order to ascertain the answer to this question, relevant facts are enumerated hereinbelow: (i) The assessee was established on May 31, 1997 initially as a Mutually Aided Co-operative Credit Society having been registered, under Section 5 of Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Co-operative Societies Act, 1995 with Registration No. AMC/RR/DCO/9714 by Registrar of Mutually

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

CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX vs. M/S SAFARI RETREATS PRIVATE LIMITED

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

4 SCC 786 18 (1971) 3 SCC 550 Civil Appeal No.2948 of 2023 etc. Page 18 of 91 • Functionality or essentiality tests must be applied to decide what a plant is. Ultimately, a plant is an apparatus used by a businessman for carrying on his business. It does not include his stock in trade, but it does include all goods

MODI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MODINAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI

The appeals are allowed in the above

Section 143 or 144. Likewise, even though there is a shortfall in payment of tax according to the calculation made in the order of assessment, the assessee is obliged to pay interest on the seventy five percent of the amount of shortfall only upto the date of the assessment order, i.e., the date on which the amount of advance

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN

4, read both textually and contextually would only apply to section 9(1)(vi)(b), and not expand the scope of the definition of royalty contained in explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vi). Further, he referred to Circular No. 10/2002 dated 09.10.2002 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes [“CBDT”] in which “remittance for royalties” and “remittance for supply

ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS vs. THANTHI TRUST

disallow the claim of the Trust for exemption under Section 4(3)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 for the Assessment

KIRLOSKAR BROS. LTD. vs. COMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PUNE

Section 4 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (in short the ‘Act’) for the compressors manufactured by it. It also filed price list in Part II for the same kind of compressors showing a lesser price of Rs. 150 of assessable value per compressor than in the Part I price list for sales to alleged bulk buyers. Notice

THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

disallowance under Section 14A was intended to cover pending assessments and for the assessment years commencing from 2001-2002. It may be noted that in the present batch of appeals, we are concerned with 1 [(2000) 242 ITR 450 SC] / (2000) 3 SCC 126. Page 4

SMITH KLINE & FRENCH [INDIA] LTD.ETC. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

disallowed if it falls inter-alia within sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of Section 40. The question, therefore, is whether the tax levied under the Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964 falls within the mischief of said sub-clause. We think it does. The preamble to the Surtax Act says that it is "an Act to impose a surtax

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

disallowance of deduction by the assessing officer under Section 80-IA (4) (iv) of the Act. Question of carbon credit

SHITAL FIBERS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

4. The return filed by the appellant was processed under Section 143(1)(a) and a statutory notice under Section 148 of the IT Act was served upon the appellant. Based on the judgment dated 17th July, 2008 of the jurisdictional ITAT, in 2 (2007) SCC OnLine ITAT 159 Civil Appeal No.14318 of 2015 etc. Page

COMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIKRAM DETERGENT LTD

The appeals are allowed to

Section 4 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. Civil Appeal No. 2579 of 2000 In this appeal, the respondent, M/s Vikram Detergent Ltd. is engaged in the packing of detergent powder received by it from M/s Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HLL). After the goods are packed, they are cleared from the factory by HLL and sold through its clearing

COMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. VIKRAM DETERGENT LTD

The appeals are allowed to the extent of disallowing

Section 4 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. Civil Appeal No. 2579 of 2000 In this appeal, the respondent, M/s. Vikram Detergent Ltd. is engaged in the packing of detergent powder received by it from M/s. Hindustan Lever Ltd. (HLL). After the goods are packed, they are cleared from the factory by HLL and sold through