TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was warranted in the facts of the case; (ii) whether the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to Assessment Year 2010-11.
Issue (i): Whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was warranted in the facts of the case.
Analysis: The issue was treated as covered by prior decisions of the Court, including the later decision in Mcdonalds's India (P.) Ltd., which had decided the point against the Revenue.
Conclusion: The issue was decided against the Revenue.
Issue (ii): Whether the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 applied to Assessment Year 2010-11.
Analysis: The issue was treated as covered by the Court's earlier decision in Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd., which had decided the point against the Revenue.
Conclusion: The issue was decided against the Revenue.
Final Conclusion: As both issues were covered by binding precedent and no substantial question of law arose, the appeal was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the questions raised are already concluded by binding precedent, no substantial question of law arises in the revenue appeal.
TaxTMI 
