|
CIT vs.Saurashtra Cement Ltd 2010 (SC)
If Supplier fails to supply within stipulated time as per agreement which provides for Liquidated damages without proof of actual loss in this case & liquidated damages recvd by assessee will b CAPITAL RECEIPT because it was not recd in course of Profit earning process |
|
|
CIT vs.Udupi Builders Pvt Ltd 2009 (Kar.)
Company established Hotel industry based on subsidy ANNOUNCED byStateGovt to encourage tourism. bt Subsidy was RECEIVED AFTER COMPLETION OF PROJECT&commncemnt of business. Purpose of subsidy is imp ¬ the time of receipt(may b recvd even after10yrs).Hence it is CAPITAL RECEIPT |
|
|
CIT vs.Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd 2010(All.)
Subsidy/grant recvd for recoupment of Capital Employed or repayment of Loan from FI for setting up/expansion of new sugar factory in not in course of trade.So,it is a CAPITAL RECEIPT NOT CHARGEABLE to TAX. Same decision was of CIT vs. Ponni Sugar & Chemicals Ltd 2008(SC) |
|
|
Chandra Ranganathan v. CIT2010(SC)
The SC held that amount recvd by employees retiring frm RBI opting for Optional Early Retirement Scheme are eligible for exemption u/s10(10C) |
|
|
CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd 2010 (SC)
Sec10(35),14A,94(7) Company purchasd cum-dividend units ofMF &then dividend declared.Company entitled2recv dividend&claimed exemptn u/s10(35) Thereafter company sold all Units(ex-dividend)at LOSS within3days&set off entire STCL. Deptt contended assessee incurred exp2earn tax free dividend ¬ allowed as per14A. SC held that its DIVIDEND STRIPPING ¬ covered by sec14A. Loss to the extend of Div Income wil b ignored |
|
|
CIT v.Hindustan Zinc Ltd 2010(Raj.)
Assessee incurred exp for alteration of dam(constructed by State Govt)to ensure sharing of water(required in large quantity)with S.Govt. without hving right or ownership in dam/water.Its an OPERATIONAL exp &REVENUE in nature |
|
|
CIT v.Hindustan Zinc Ltd 2010(Raj.)
Assessee incurred exp for alteration of dam(constructed by State Govt)to ensure sharing of water(required in large quantity)with S.Govt. without hving right or ownership in dam/water.Its an OPERATIONAL exp &REVENUE in nature |
|
|
TRF Ltd v.CIT2010(SC)
After1.4.1989,its not necessary for assessee2establish that debt, in fact,has become irrecoverable.Its enough if bad debt is written off as irrecoverable in a/c of assessee.(No need2prove) |
|
|
CIT v. Asian Hotels Ltd 2010(Del.)
Notional Interest on intt free deposit given by tenant to landlord is NOT assessable either as PGBP or IHP |
|
|
CIT v. Smt.A.Sivakami & Another 2010
Assessee is eligible to claim depreciation on the busses not registered in her name but she is beneficial owner. Owner is a person who is entitled to receive income from property in his own right. Owner need not necessarily b lawful owner entitled to pass on the title of property to another |
|
|
CIT v. Smt.A.Sivakami & Another 2010
Assessee is eligible to claim depreciation on the busses not registered in her name but she is beneficial owner. Owner is a person who is entitled to receive income from property in his own right. Owner need not necessarily b lawful owner entitled to pass on the title of property to another |
|
|
CIT v. Sundaram Clayton Ltd 2010 (Mad.)
Exp on purchase of software component has to be treated as REVENUE exp. Also,upgradation of computer config is not a change of enduring nature & hence its REVENUE exp |
|
|
Dr.Aswath N.Rao v. ACIT 2010 (Karn.)
Exp incurred for purchase of 2nd hand medical equipment for use as spare parts for existing equipment is a REVENUE expenditure |
|
|
CIT v. Neelavathi & Others2010(Karn.)
Payment to Police & Gundas to keep away from Cinema Theatre run by assessee amounts to bribe/illegal payment.Hence deduction is NOT ALLOWABLE. |
|
|
CIT v. Sagar Talkies 2010(Karn.)
Assessee replaced the old sound system with a new Dolby stereo system. Since there was no change in seating capacity, the expenditure on such change of sound system could not be considered as capital expenditure |
|
|
thanks Adarsh for giving the information about direct tax. |
|
|