The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Swapna Lahari Pvt Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

73 institutions, who are members of religious congregations receiving salary from the Government exchequer. The aforesaid communication resulted in the writ petitions challenging the direction issued by the Income Tax Officers. Writs of mandamus were sought to direct the disbursement officers not to deduct TDS from the salary of teachers who are members of the petitioners' congregations. Three individual priests

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

73 institutions, who are members of religious congregations receiving salary from the Government exchequer. The aforesaid communication resulted in the writ petitions challenging the direction issued by the Income Tax Officers. Writs of mandamus were sought to direct the disbursement officers not to deduct TDS from the salary of teachers who are members of the petitioners' congregations. Three individual priests

The Commissioner of Income Tax -1 vs. Harmahendar Singh Bagga

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

73 institutions, who are members of religious congregations receiving salary from the Government exchequer. The aforesaid communication resulted in the writ petitions challenging the direction issued by the Income Tax Officers. Writs of mandamus were sought to direct the disbursement officers not to deduct TDS from the salary of teachers who are members of the petitioners' congregations. Three individual priests

Commissioner of Income TAx-II, Hyderabad vs. M/s. Sri Balaji Bio MAss Power Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

73 institutions, who are members of religious congregations receiving salary from the Government exchequer. The aforesaid communication resulted in the writ petitions challenging the direction issued by the Income Tax Officers. Writs of mandamus were sought to direct the disbursement officers not to deduct TDS from the salary of teachers who are members of the petitioners' congregations. Three individual priests

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. The Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

73 institutions, who are members of religious congregations receiving salary from the Government exchequer. The aforesaid communication resulted in the writ petitions challenging the direction issued by the Income Tax Officers. Writs of mandamus were sought to direct the disbursement officers not to deduct TDS from the salary of teachers who are members of the petitioners' congregations. Three individual priests

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

Sections 36 (1) (iii) of the Act are met, deduction of interest cannot be denied merely because the Assessee was a cash rich company having enough resources of its own. 68. It is pointed out that in the earlier years Gopal Das Bhawan was still under construction and the interest was capitalised only up to the stage of completion

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

Sections 36 (1) (iii) of the Act are met, deduction of interest cannot be denied merely because the Assessee was a cash rich company having enough resources of its own. 68. It is pointed out that in the earlier years Gopal Das Bhawan was still under construction and the interest was capitalised only up to the stage of completion

The Commissioner of Income Tax - IV vs. National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.,

The appeal is dismissed

1) ITR OL1. Reference was also made to the judgment of the Apex Court in Mepco Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT, 319 ITR 208 recording that the issue being debatable, recourse to rectification under Section 154 of the Act to change the opinion, could not be undertaken. [3]. It is not disputed that the tax effect in the present appeal

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, vs. M/s. Prasad Film Laboratories Ltd.,

Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the award dated 19th December, 2011 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator. 2. The Petitioner – Food Corporation of India (hereinafter, ‘FCI’) and M/s Shankar Rice and General Mills (hereinafter ‘miller’) had entered into two milling agreements dated 8th November, 1994 and 15th November, 1994. Under the said contracts, the miller