Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

August 2000

Sec. 260A, Sec. 28(iiia)

Delhi H.C : Whether the Tribunal Delhi, Bench-A was justified in holding that the amount, received by assessee on account of forfeiture of advance guarantee commission is business income and not income for other sources in terms of s. 28(iiia) of the Act

Avijit Das / August 30, 2000

High Court Of Delhi CIT & Anr. vs. Banaras House Ltd. Sections 28(iiia), 260A Asst. Year 1989-90 Arijit Pasayat, C.J. […]

Income Tax Case Laws

Delhi H.C : Making allegation that adequate and proper action is not being taken under s. 132 of the IT Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), this petition is stated to have been filed in public interest.

Avijit Das / August 30, 2000

High Court Of Delhi Namit Verma vs. Union Of India & Ors. Section Art. 226 Arijit Pasayat, C.J. & D.K.

Sec. 35B, Sec. 37(1), Section 32, Section 32A

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that payment for bank guarantee commission was an expenditure of capital nature ?

Avijit Das / August 29, 2000

High Court Of Gujarat Mihir Textile Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 32A, 35B, 37(1) Asst. Year 1976-77, 1977-78, 1978-79 D.M. Dharmadhikari,

Section 33, Section 80J

Gujarat H.C : Whether the Tribunal has been right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to claim development rebate on the expenditure incurred on the factory compound wall as claimed ?

Avijit Das / August 29, 2000

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Gujarat State Fertilizers Co. Ltd. Sections 33, 80J Asst. year 1970-71 D.M. Dharmadhikari, C.J.

Sec. 35B, Section 147

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the reopening of the assessment under s. 147(b) was not valid ?

Avijit Das / August 29, 2000

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Indian Overseas Bank Sections 35B, 147(b) Asst. Year 1976-77 N.K. Jain, Actg, C.J. &

Sec. 206C, Section 206

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether holders of L-14 or L-14A licence issued under the Punjab Liquor Licence Rules, 1956, fall within the meaning of the term “buyer” under s. 206C

Avijit Das / August 26, 2000

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Ashok Kumar & Ors. vs. Union Of India & Ors. Section 206C G.S. Singhvi

Delhi H.C : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the respondent. By this criminal revision, the petitioner seeks to challenge the judgment and order of the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dt. 4th April, 1997, whereby the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate declined to discharge the petitioner for the alleged offence under s. 276B of the IT Act, 1961.

Avijit Das / August 25, 2000

High Court Of Delhi A.K. Verma vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Section 276B R.S. Sodhi, J. Crl. Rev. No. 181 of

Delhi H.C : Chief Metropolitan Magistrate declined to discharge the petitioner for the alleged offence under s. 276B of the IT Act, 1961.

Avijit Das / August 25, 2000

High Court Of Delhi A.K. Verma vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Section 276B R.S. Sodhi, J. Crl. Rev. No. 181 of

Gift Tax Act, Sec. 2(XII)

Kerala H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that even though the reconstitution of the firm resulted in the reduction of the share of profit of the assessee-trust, there was no gift exigible to tax in its hands ?

Avijit Das / August 24, 2000

High Court Of Kerala Commissioner Of Gift Tax vs. Sree Narayana Chandrika Trust Sections GT 2(xii) S. Sankarasubban & Kum.

Madhya Pradesh H.C : On a prima facie finding that the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue, CIT issued notice, dt. 10th May, 2000, under s. 263 of the IT Act, calling upon the petitioner to file clarification supported with the details. It is this order of the CIT which has been challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition, filed under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Avijit Das / August 24, 2000

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Bhagwandas Shobhalal Jain vs. CIT & Anr. Sections 263, Art. 226, Art, 227 C.K. Prasad,

Post pagination

1 2 … 4 Next →

Copyright © 2024 taxcaselaw.com | Powered by Astra WordPress Theme

Scroll to Top