Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

April 2006

Delhi H.C : All that we need mention is that pursuant to an order made by the CIT(A) passed on 31st March, 2004, the GTO computed the amount of gift- tax payable by the petitioner and charged interest under s. 220(2) r/w s. 32(2) of the GT Act w.e.f. 17th May, 1995

Avijit Das / April 27, 2006

High Court Of Delhi Mansarovar Investments Ltd. vs. CIT Section GT 24(1) T.S. Thakur & Shiv Narayan Dhingra, JJ. Writ […]

Income Tax Case Laws, Sec. 139(1), Sec. 43(1), Section 139, Section 32, Section 32A, Section 72

Gujarat H.C : Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the ITO to allow to carry forward business loss, though time was not extended by the ITO for filing of return ?

Avijit Das / April 27, 2006

High Court Of Gujarat CIT vs. Swastik Sanitary Works Ltd. Sections 32, 32A, 43(1), 72, 139(1) Asst. Year 1985-86 J.M.

Sec. 115J, Sec. 234B, Sec. 234C, Section 234

S.C : Dhruv Mehta, Harsh Vardhan Jha & Yasraj Singh Deora, for the Respondent.

Avijit Das / April 26, 2006

Supreme Court Of India CIT vs. Kwality Biscuits Ltd. Sections 115J, 234B, 234C Asst. Year 1989-90 Mrs. Ruma Pal &

Delhi H.C : Whether the AO could have imposed liability on the assessee without giving any reasons ?

Avijit Das / April 26, 2006

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Denso India Ltd. Section 115JA Madan B. Lokur, J. ITA No. 247/2006 26th April,

Rajasthan H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in law in quashing the order under s. 263 of the IT Act passed by the CIT ?

Avijit Das / April 26, 2006

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Mangilal Didwania Section 256(2) Asst. Year 1990-91 Rajesh Balia & R.P. Vyas, JJ. IT

Section 147, Section 148, Section 151, Section 282

Rajasthan H.C : The AO had not misread the explanatory note and, therefore, had a reason to believe that income had escaped assessment

Avijit Das / April 25, 2006

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Uttam Chand Nahar Sections 147, 148, 151, 282, CPC order 5, R. 15 Asst.

Sec. 254(1), Section 254, Section 43, Section 43B

Gauhati H.C : Whether s. 43B of the Act empowers the assessing authority to make addition to the income of the assessee of the amount representing the employees’ contribution to the provident fund, which although credited to the employees’ account but not deposited during the relevant accounting year and also having not been claimed as a deduction in the P&L a/c of the relevant assessment year ?

Avijit Das / April 25, 2006

High Court Of Gauhati The Assam Tribune vs. CIT & Anr. Sections 43B, 254(1), ITAT RULE 11 Asst. Year 1991-92

Sec. 269T, Section 271E

Delhi H.C : The AO held that this repayment was contrary to the provisions of s. 269T of the IT Act, which inter alia, required that such repayment could not be made except by an account payee cheque or an account payee bank draft drawn in the name of the person who had advanced the loan

Avijit Das / April 24, 2006

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Vikramajit Singh Sections 269T, 271E Asst. Year 2001-02 T.S. Thakur & Shiv Narayan Dhingra,

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities below were justified in upholding the action under s. 145(2) ?

Avijit Das / April 24, 2006

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Axia Engg. Works vs. CIT Sections 145(2), 260A Asst. Year 1991-92 Adarsh Kumar Goel

Allahabad H.C : Whether the non-mention of s. 145 in the order of the AO vitiates the action by the AO ?

Avijit Das / April 24, 2006

High Court Of Allahabad Jai Prakash Sahu vs. CIT & Ors. Section 145 Sushil Harkauli & Vikram Nath, JJ. IT

Post pagination

1 2 … 5 Next →

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

Scroll to Top