Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Vs M/s. Anand Transport No.1, 9th Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 34
.... herefore, being a temporary structure, it was entitled to 100% depreciation, as per the provisions of Section 32 of the Act, read with Rule 5 framed thereunder. 8. The Assessing Officer, however, relying upon the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of Tulsi (SK) & Sons v. CIT, ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Cadensworth (India) Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-I(3), Chennai-34
.... case before us, it is not the repair work that was carried on but creation of an asset itself by incurring an whooping expenditure of Rs.1,18,33,613/-. Considering the facts of the present case before us, and based on our above discussions, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the elaborate ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Smt. Anita Kumaran
.... text, the Supreme Court observed that it was not a case of "voluntary disclosure" and, therefore, penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was rightly levied. This aspect of the matter comes through, upon a close perusal of the following observation made in paragraph 9 of the judgment: ".....9. ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Planet Pop Foods Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Customs
.... I have heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. 12. In my view, while there can be no cavil with the proposition that respondent No.2 has no power to condone the delay under the provisions of Section 128 of the Act, what is required to be considered in the given facts o ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Lancor Holdings Limited Vs Mr. Prem Kumar Menon
.... ss of reputation and goodwill. j) Directing the respondents to jointly and severally pay the claimant a sum of Rs.30,18,104/- towards property tax, fire insurance and IBMS cost. k) Directing that the claimant is entitled to the original of the power of attorney dated 29.03.2006 executed by the ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Interbulk Trading Vs Adam and Coal Resources Private Limited
.... (1994) Supp 1 SCC 644]. 22.1. It was argued that the learned Arbitrator failed to note that the acceptance of the settlement agreement was conditional, in view of the aforementioned e-mails, i.e., e-mails dated 23.09.2011, 27.09.2011 and 29.09.2011, and that, it was only after receipt of the bala ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Hardy Exploration & Production (India) Inc. Vs M/s. Samson Maritime Limited
.... elhi 604 b) M/s. Meattles Pvt. Ltd. v. HDFC Bank Limited. Reasons: 21. I have heard the learned senior counsels appearing for the parties and perused the records. 22. Counsel for the parties, during the course of arguments, agreed that the dispute, in sum, in the present petition, perta ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
In re Equitas Finance Limited Vs
.... the Companies Act, 1956 (in short 1956 Act). Section 394 of the 1956 Act, to my mind, gives the relevant leeway in that behalf which, in the context of facts and circumstances obtaining in the present case, remind one of, in a manner of speech, a typical chicken and egg situation. 9.2. The reason ...
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Get In Touch With Us
We are here to help. Want to learn more about our services? Please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you!
