Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

April 2002

Sec. 7(4), Section 7

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the house property was used for residential purpose and therefore, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of s. 7(4) of the WT Act, 1957 so as to have the property valued as on 1st April, 1971 ?

Avijit Das / April 19, 2002

High Court Of Gujarat Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Anilkumar M. Virani Section WT 7(4) Asst. Year 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81 […]

Delhi H.C : There is no dispute on facts found by the Tribunal and the question raised is a pure question of law, we dispense with a formal statement of facts; treat the petition as a regular reference and proceed to answer the question proposed.

Avijit Das / April 19, 2002

High Court Of Delhi (Full Bench) CIT vs. Kalvinator Of India Ltd. Section 147 Asst. Year 1987-88 S.B. Sinha, C.J.;

Sec. 254(1), Section 250, Section 254

Rajasthan H.C : Whether the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in ignoring the material collected by CIT(A) under s. 250(A) of the Act and reversing the finding of CIT(A) based on such material solely on the ground that material so collected by CIT(A) was inadmissible?

Avijit Das / April 19, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan Rishabh Textiles vs. CIT Sections 250(4), 254(1) N.N. Mathur & D.N. Joshi, JJ. IT Ref. No.

Section 147, Section 148

Delhi H.C : The petitioner has challenged the reassessment under s. 147(a) of the IT Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) and the issuance of notice under s. 148 of the Act on the ground that there was no material before the Department for coming to the conclusion that the matter required reassessment.

Avijit Das / April 19, 2002

High Court Of Delhi Rama Hing Suppliers vs. Union Of India Section Art. 226 S.K. Mahajan, J. Civil Writ No.

Sec. 256(1), Section 256

Bombay H.C : the CIT (A) was justified in directing that the sum of Rs. 4,07,283 being interest received on the broken period of the securities sold by the assessee should not be considered as part of the chargeable income for the year of account

Avijit Das / April 18, 2002

High Court Of Bombay American Express International Banking Corpn. vs. I.S. Nigam Sections 256(1), ITAT RULES r. 43, ITAT RULES

Sec. 36(1)(iii), Sec. 41(1), Section 41

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law allowing interest paid to third parties placing reliance on the judgment of CIT vs. Jain Construction Co. (1999) 156 CTR (Raj) 290, whereas in the said judgment, the Hon’ble High Court has not held that interest to third parties are allowable out of income arrived by applying net profit rate ?

Avijit Das / April 18, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Bhawan Va Path Nirman (Bohra)& Co. Sections 36(1)(iii), 41(1), 145 Asst. Year 1995-96 Rajesh

Sec. 260A, Section 145, Section 260

Rajasthan H.C : whether the Tribunal was justified in law allowing interest paid to third parties. Reference to CIT vs. Jain Construction Company (1999) 156 CTR (Raj) 290 is primarily for the purpose of showing that whether on reaching this conclusion, reliance can be placed on that judgment laying down any such rate.

Avijit Das / April 18, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Bhawan Va Path Nirman (Bohra)& Co. Sections 145, 260A Asst. Year 1994-95, 1996-97 Rajesh

Section 237, Section 246

Calcutta H.C : The petitioner had moved Writ Petition No. 107 of 2001 before this Court. In the said writ petition, it was alleged that the writ petitioner by way of an application made a prayer to the IT authorities for refund of certain amount of tax paid in excess, but the concerned authority was not refunding the same.

Avijit Das / April 18, 2002

High Court Of Calcutta N. Chakravorti & Co. & Anr. vs. Union Of India & Ors. Sections 237, 246(1)(k), Art.

Sec. 2(p), Sec. 2(q)

Gujarat H.C : the assessee was entitled to exemption under s. 5(1)(iii) of the WT Act, 1957, in respect of new building constructed by him in place of the old recognised Palace

Avijit Das / April 17, 2002

High Court Of Gujarat Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. D.S. Virawala Suragwala Sections WT 2(p), WT 5(1)(iii) Asst. Year 1977-78,

Rajasthan H.C : Both the reference applications under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, are at the instance of the Revenue from the order of the Tribunal, dt. 3rd Sept., 1997. The IT Ref. No. 43. 1998 pertains to asst. yr. 1981-82 and the IT Ref. No. 1/1998 pertains to asst. yr. 1982-83 and the same assessee namely, Ishwardass Mutha.

Avijit Das / April 17, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Ishwardass Mutha Sections 256(2) Asst. Year 1981-82, 1982-83 N.N. Mathur & D.N. Joshi, JJ.

Post pagination

← Previous 1 2 3 4 … 6 Next →

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

Scroll to Top