The Commissioner of Income Tax - IV vs. M/s. Mekins Agro Product (P) Ltd.

dividends, voluntary payment received by trust, etc. It may be noted that profits and gains are generally used in terms of business or profession as provided u/s. 28. The word " income ", therefore, is a much wider term than the expression profits and gains of business or profession ". Net receipt after deducting all the necessary expenditure of the trust (sic). There

AP. STATE SEEDS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HYD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, HYD.

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

dividends paid or proposed; or (f) the amount or arnounts of expenditure relatable to any income to which any of the provisions of Chapter III applies; or (g) the amount withdrawn from the reserve account under Section 80HHD, where it has been utilised for any purpose other than those referred to in Sub-section (4) of that section

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s Indur Green Power Private Limited

In the result, all the appeals fail and are hereby

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Depreciation 1,05,72,696 1,10,86,334 1,26,18,427 1,39,66,450 Total Expenditure 4,81,29,896 4,75,41,722 5,01,63,902 3,88,21,912 Profit for the year 2,53,21,438 2,09,87,242 62,58,319 836236 Add Balance brought forward

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri P.Sarveswara Rao

Appeals are partly allowed, in view of the

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

depreciation and not the grant of deduction in respect of Sales-tax collections which had not been paid in accordance with the provisions of sec.43-B of the IT Act. (e) No objection on the issue whether the assessee‟s industrial undertaking was set up in a backward area, notified by the Central Govt. for the purpose of benefit under provisions

THE STATE BANK OF HYD. vs. THE JT.COMMI.SPL.RANGE IV HYD.

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question. Therefore, it is open to the respondent to argue before the High Court that the substantial questions of larn

Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajahmundry vs. M/s. Kakinada Coop. Town Bank LTd., Kakinada

Bench: The Court Is: “Whether, The Shares Invested Through A Portfolio Management

dividend, where the holding period was ranging from a few days to a few months, it was concluded that the income was business income earned by way of adventure in the nature of trade 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (“CIT(A)”)held that the intention at the time of purchase and sale, the magnitude and frequency of transactions