COMM.OF INCOMETAX AP I HYD vs. M/S.DIAMOND HATCHERIES P.LTD HYD

145 Taxation, 319 that in view of sections 80AB and 80B(5) deduction is to be allowed on profits under sections 80HH and 80I as computed after deduction under section 32AB. We may also refer to the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Century Iron and Steel Limited vs. ITO 31 ITD 117 wherein

THE COMMI.OF INCOME TAX,HYD. vs. VAIBHAV

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 145 of the Act, determined net profit of the assessee at Rs.63,i3,326.00. Funher making allowance for business loss and depreciation of earlier )tars, the income of 5 us the assessee was quantified at Rs. 22,61,520.00. It is this order of the Tribunal, nhich is under impugnment in the two appeals before 10. In the appeal

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) vs. M/s. Yashoda Super Speciality Hospital

In the result, the appeal fails

depreciation of Assessment Years 1988-89 and 1989-90 amounting Rs.72,02,83,028/-, the income was determined to be ‘NIL’. The Commissioner in exercise of powers under Section 263 of the Act vide order dated 12.11.2007 held that the order of assessment dated 26.12.2012 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and consequently set aside the same

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt. Pushpa Devi Tibrewala

Bench: U.DURGA PRASAD RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

Section 145 (3), the expenses claimed were based upon an incorrect interpretation of the ICAI’s guidelines. The precise transaction related to forward contract. The assessee had interpreted the guidelines of the standard in such a manner as to claim the losses/gains as and when the contract matured. The Assessing Officer was of the opinion that this was incorrect