Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

December 2002

Madhya Pradesh H.C : This judgment shall govern the disposal of the aforesaid appeals. In the aforesaid appeals, common question of law is involved, as such, they have been heard together and being disposed of by the common judgment

Avijit Das / December 17, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench Union Of India vs. Abdul Zarkhan Sections 276DD S.B. Sakrikar, J. Criminal […]

Madhya Pradesh H.C : This order shall govern the disposal of the aforesaid two appeals filed on behalf of Union of India respectively against the order dt. 24th Nov., 1992, passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Economic Offence, Indore in Criminal Case No. 57/1990 and Criminal Case No. 56/1990 whereby the accused-respondent was acquitted of the offence under s. 276C

Avijit Das / December 17, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench Union Of India vs. Smt. Birdibai Garg Sections 276C Asst. Year 1985-86,

Sec. 2(15), Section 11, Section 13

S.C : These appeals arise out of the judgments of the High Court of Bombay dismissing the appeals filed by the Revenue under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Avijit Das / December 16, 2002

Supreme Court Of India Director Of Income Tax vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse Section 2(15), 11, 13(1)(c)(ii),13(2)(a), 13(3)(a) Asst. Year 1989-90,

Sec. 139(1), Sec. 36(1)(ii), Section 139, Section 43B

Kerala H.C : This IT appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, in ITA No. 843/Coch/1990, dt. 8th Dec., 2000.

Avijit Das / December 13, 2002

High Court Of Kerala CIT vs. Chackolas Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. Sections 36(1)(ii), 43B, 139(1) Asst. Year 1992-93 S.

Delhi H.C : The challenge in this writ petition is to the notice dt. 31st July, 2002, and the letter dt. 28th Oct., 2002, issued by the Dy. CIT, Central Circle XXI, Kolkata, under ss. 142(1) and 158BC

Avijit Das / December 13, 2002

High Court Of Delhi Smt. Sarita Jain vs. CIT & Ors. Sections 127(2) D.K. Jain & Mahmood Ali Khan, JJ.

Allahabad H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the incomes of the two periods could not be clubbed ?

Avijit Das / December 12, 2002

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. A.D. Qureshi Section 187(2) Asst. Year 1976-77 M. Katju & Yatindra Singh, JJ. IT

Delhi H.C : By this writ petition the petitioner, hereinafter referred to as the assessee, seeks to impugn an order, dt. 29th Jan., 1976, passed by the ITO, declining to waive/reduce the interest charged under s. 215 of the IT Act, 1961

Avijit Das / December 12, 2002

High Court Of Delhi Brig. Anant Singh vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Anr. Section 215, Rule 40 Asst. year

Sec. 260A, Section 195, Section 260

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that no tax was to be deducted at source on payment made by the assessee to AVL-Gesselschaft Fur Verbrennungskraftmachlan M.B.H. Austria for the feasibility study of improving the performance of the existing Diesel Engine 265 DI as the payment represented fees for technical services and not royalty?

Avijit Das / December 12, 2002

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. Sections 195, 260A S.H. Kapadia & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. IT

Orissa H.C : Amalgamation took place between Kalinga Tubes Limited and Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., the petitioner herein. The said amalgamation was finally approved by the company Court by order dt. 11th Dec., 1981

Avijit Das / December 12, 2002

High Court Of Orissa Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd. vs. Union Of India & Ors. Sections 72A, Art. 14

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in interpreting the implication of Gurupad Khandappa Magdum vs. Hirabai Khandappa Magdum (1981) 129 ITR 440 (SC) and consequently holding that there was a notional partition on the death of the Karta/deceased and therefore, the ancestral/HUF property did not belong to the HUF as the HUF did not survive ?

Avijit Das / December 12, 2002

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Vishwas D. Ranade Section 4 Asst. Year 1976-77 S.H. Kapadia & J.P. Devadhar, JJ.

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 8 Next →

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

Scroll to Top