M/s.V.R.Farms Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

115-JAA can be given before computing interest under Section 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ? ITA Nos. 402/2005 & Others Page No.9 of 44 2. Question A has been formulated in ITA Nos. 402/2005, 407/2007, 907/2007, 914/2007, 969/2007, 989/2007, 1350/2007, 546/2008, 701/2008, and 893/2008. Question B has been framed in ITA Nos. 1474/2006, 708/2007, 719/2007, 791/2007, 829/2007, 986/2007, 992/2007

COMM OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S. BALAN NATURAL FOOD PRIVATE LTD., HYD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

115 JB of the Act, the tax was computed at Rs.12,60,62,901/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and Notices under Section 143(2) of the Act were issued on 05.09.2008 and 26.09.2008. The Assessing Officer by order dated 09.12.2009 inter alia disallowed the deduction of Rs.20,00,00,000/- claimed under Section 36(1)(viii

The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax vs. D.L.V. Sridhar

Bench: D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

115 JB of the Act. 3. The respondent assessee had two units: One unit was located in a ITA No.365/2018 Page 2 of 9 non-STPI zone and hence its income was taxable. The other unit was located in a STPI zone in Gurgaon and its income was exempted under Section 10-A of the Act. The STPI unit

Commissioner of Income Tax [TDS] vs. The Executive Engineer

In the result, these appeals fail and are

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SEETHARAMA MURTI

depreciation, if any, is to be provided and allowed for in the account? 7. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in concluding that banking companies are exempt from MAT provisions even when there is no specific exemption for the banking companies in the provisions of section 115

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Hetero Labs Ltd

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

115 JB to the case of the Appellant Rs.3,59,58,370/- is to be reduced from the book profit in full? (ii) In the alternative and without prejudice in the event that the answer to the above question is in the negative, whether on the facts and in the 3 circumstances while applying u/s 115JB to the case

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

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

115-J. (1 Notwithstanding anything contained in any other pro,,ision of this Act, where in the case of an assessee being a company (other than a company engaged i r the business of generation or distribution of electricity , the total income, as computed under this Act in respet t of aly previous year relevant to the assessmer rt year