Judgements and Orders, Supreme Court and High courts of India

The facts in brief. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of running of hospitals under the brand name “Metro” in various parts of the country. The company has high expertise in operating and managing Nursing Homes/Hospitals specially wit

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return declaring an income of Rs. 1,82,480 for AY 2005-06. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 11

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return for AY 2006-07 on 31.3.2007 declaring an income of Rs.2,45,570 and the return was processed and subsequently selected for scrutiny on the basis of AIR information received.

Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring loss of ``5,51,91,000/- filed on 29.09.2008 by the assessee, carrying on the business of financing, leasing and investment activities, after being processed on 05.08.2009 u/s 143 (1) o

Brief facts are: The assessee was an employee of Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation, USA (“BMGF” ), USA and was appointed to work with the liaison office of BMGF, New Delhi as Director in its India AIDS initiative program. Assessee could not file his

Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that the return declaring income of ``4,29,40,331/- filed on 27.09.2008 by the assessee, engaged in the business of import and trading in yarn and knitting needles besides generation of wind power, was sele

In his appeal, as many as twelve grounds are raised by the assessee. However, at the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned counsel that the major dispute in this appeal is with regard to the addition made under Section 68 of the Inco

Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) has erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowances of Rs.707376/- made by the A.O. on account of discount of sale ignoring the fact that said discount

Ground of appeal relates to the grievance of the appellant against the action of the Assessing Officer in making an addition of Rs.1,12,53,000/- on account of warranty and other expenses. It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that, the identica

The fact of the case pointed in the following points: FOR THAT the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Jalpaiguri acted unlawfully in upholding the assessment order framed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. Income Tax Officer,