Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court rules in favor of assessee on tax issues including deductions under section 80J and 80G

        Saurashtra Cement And Chemical Industries Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat V

        Saurashtra Cement And Chemical Industries Limited Versus Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat V - [1980] 123 ITR 669, 11 CTR 139, 2 TAXMANN 22 Issues Involved:
        1. Continuation of relief u/s 80J for the assessment year 1969-70.
        2. Deduction u/s 80G for donations made in kind.
        3. Application of section 40(a)(v) regarding expenditure on the building occupied by the managing director.

        Summary:

        Issue 1: Continuation of Relief u/s 80J
        The Tribunal held that the relief granted u/s 80J for the assessment year 1968-69 should continue for the subsequent year 1969-70 unless the initial year's relief is disturbed. The Tribunal emphasized that the ITO cannot withdraw the relief without disturbing the initial year's assessment. The High Court affirmed this view, stating that the relief under s. 80J can only be withheld if the initial year's relief is disturbed on valid grounds. The court referenced the decision in Addl. CIT v. Tarun Commercial Mills Ltd. [1978] 113 ITR 745, supporting the principle that specific enactments override general ones. Thus, question No. 1 was answered in the affirmative, in favor of the assessee.

        Issue 2: Deduction u/s 80G for Donations in Kind
        The Tribunal upheld the deduction of Rs. 1,051 for the value of cement bags donated to a charitable trust, despite the donation being in kind. The Tribunal and the High Court referenced the Bombay High Court decision in CIT v. Associated Cement Co. Ltd. [1968] 68 ITR 478, which allowed similar deductions. The High Court agreed that the substance of the transaction should be considered, and thus, the deduction was justified. Question No. 2 was answered in the affirmative, in favor of the assessee.

        Issue 3: Application of Section 40(a)(v)
        The Tribunal applied section 40(a)(v) to the expenditure of Rs. 88,701 incurred on the building occupied by the managing director, directing a minimum disallowance of Rs. 76,701. The High Court referenced its decision in Addl. CIT v. Tarun Commercial Mills Ltd., concluding that specific provisions for directors' expenses should prevail over general ones. Consequently, question No. 1 in Income-tax Reference No. 238 of 1975 was answered in the negative, in favor of the assessee, and question No. 2 was not pressed.

        Conclusion:
        In Income-tax Reference No. 238 of 1975, question No. 1 was answered in the negative, favoring the assessee, and question No. 2 was not pressed. In Income-tax Reference No. 239 of 1975, both questions were answered in the affirmative, favoring the assessee. The Commissioner of Income-tax was ordered to pay the costs to the assessee.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found