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

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

Section 80-HHC, IT Act in the sum of Rs. 3.78 crores. But, holding that there was a net loss from export of goods, the Assessing Officer disallowed

M/S. SARAF EXPORTS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR - III

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

disallowing the deductions claimed under Section 80-IB of the Act, 1961. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High

SHAH ORIGINALS vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 24 MUMBAI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.V.N. BHATTI

disallowance of gain earned from foreign exchange fluctuations by the assessee without recording findings on crucial matters in issue. 3.1 It is argued that sub-section (1) of Section 80

A.M. MOOSA vs. COMMNR OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM

Section 80-HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (in short, ’the Act’). The assessing officer disallowed the claim on the ground

THE MAVILAYI SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CALICUT

Bench: Us, The Assessing Officer Denied Their Claims For Deduction, Relying Upon Section 80P(4) Of The It Act, Holding That As Per The Audited Receipt & 2

disallow deductions claimed under section 80P of the IT Act, notwithstanding that mere nomenclature or registration certificates issued under the Kerala Act would show that the assessees are primary agricultural credit societies. These divergent decisions led to a reference order dated 09.07.2018 to a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court. 4 5. The Full Bench of the Kerala High

B.L. PASSI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (XI)

The appeal is dismissed with no

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL

Section 80-O of the IT Act which had been claimed in 8 the return of income filed. However, the Assessing Officer, by order dated 27.03.2000, disallowed

M/S POLYFLEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Section 80-IB of the Income Tax Act (for short, ‘IT Act’). The assessing officer disallowed the deduction under Section

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 vs. M/S. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

Sections 80HH, 80-I and 80-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). Admissibility of benefit under the aforesaid provision depends upon the question as to whether bottling of LPG is an activity which amounts to 3 ‘production’ or ‘manufacturing’ for the purposes of the aforesaid provisions of the Act. 2) The Assessing Officers

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 11 (1) BANGALORE vs. M/S ACE MULTI AXES SYSTEMS LTD

Appeals are disposed of in the same terms

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL

Section 80 IB(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and directed fresh decision on the said issue vide order dated 16th January, 2009. Thereafter, the Assessing authority on 14th December, 2009 disallowed

IPCA LABORATORY LTD. vs. DY. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

Section 80 HHC for Rs. 3.78 crores. During the assessment proceedings it was found that the Appellants were exporting goods which were self manufactured as well as goods manufactured by supporting manufacturers i.e. trading goods. It was found that the sum of Rs. 3.78 crores, which had been claimed as a deduction, was the profit from exports of self manufactured

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, BANGALORE vs. M/S WIPRO LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

80 of the IT Act. 9 4.3 It is further submitted that though it was not necessary for the exercise of option under Section 10B (8) of the IT Act, the assessee filed a revised return only to bring to the notice of the AO the factum of exercise of option under Section 10B. Even if the revised return

KRISHAK BHARATI COOPERATIVE LTD. vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, N.D

Appeal stands disposed of with no order as to costs

Section 80-I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the 1961 Act”). For the said reasons, the CIT(A) disallowed

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (IT)-I, MUMBAI vs. M/S. AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

disallowance can be made under section 44C in the facts and circumstances of this case. That section 44C applies only when a foreign company operates through its branches in India is made clear even in the explanatory note appended to the Finance Bill, 1976. [...] The difficulties of the nature as stated in the said memorandum as well

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COIMBATORE vs. M/S. LAKSHMI MACHINE WORKS

disallow a part of 80HHC concession when the entire deduction claimed could not be regarded as relatable to exports. Therefore, while interpreting the words "total turnover" in the above formula in Section 80HHC one has to give a schematic interpretation to that expression. There is one more reason for giving schematic interpretation. The various amendments to Section 80HHC show that

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

80,09,880/- Tax there on : (as per computation Form enclosed). Tax payable : Rs.19,57,32,920/- 6) It may be pointed out that in the appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) {CIT(A)}, the order of the Assessing Officer making disallowance under Section

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA

disallowances, relying heavily on the legislative intent and the definition of "long-term finance" in the Explanation to Section 36(1)(viii). This view was subsequently affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and finally by the High Court vide the impugned judgment dated 28.11.2011. C. Findings of the High Court 6. The High Court affirmed the findings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. CORE HEALTH CARE LTD

disallowance of Rs.1,56,76,000/- in respect of borrowings utilized for purchase of machines. Accordingly, the above question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 15. Apart from the above question under Section 36(1)(iii), the present civil appeals are filed by the Department against the decision of the High Court whereby the High