Month: May 2009

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the assessee-petitioner is entitled to payment of interest on the amount of refund in accordance with the provisions of s. 244(1A) and s. 214 of the Act as interpreted in Sandvik Asia Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 200 CTR (SC) 505 : (2006) 280 ITR 643 (SC)

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Roadmaster Industries Of India (P) Ltd. cs. CIT & Anr. Section 214, 244(1A) Asst. Year 1978-79, 1979-80, 1980-81 M.M. Kumar & H.S. Bhalla, JJ. Civil Writ Petn. Nos. 10223 to 10225 and 10235 of 2007 25th May, 2009 Counsel Appeared : Sanjay Bansal with Ms. Namita Verma, for the Petitioner …

Delhi H.C : Whether where no incriminating material had been collected in course of a simultaneous search under section 132 carried out on assessee along with alleged connected concerns, Assessing Officer was justified in making addition to assessee’s income under section 69A relying upon statements of a third party recorded during a consequent survey conducted under section 133A

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Concorde Capital Management Co. Ltd. Section : 69A Vikramajit Sen And Rajiv Shakdher, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 185 And 353 Of 2009 May 20, 2009 JUDGMENT Vikramajit Sen, J. – ITA No. 185/2009 This appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) has been preferred …

Delhi H.C : the revenue assailing the order of the CIT(A), who had deleted the addition of Rs. 68,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Act

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Concorde Capital Management Co. Ltd. Section : 69A Vikramajit Sen And Rajiv Shakdher, JJ. IT Appeal Nos. 185 And 353 Of 2009 May 20, 2009 JUDGMENT Vikramajit Sen, J. – ITA No. 185/2009 This appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) has been preferred …

Gauhati H.C : the learned Tribunal has interfered with the addition of undisclosed income of the respondent assessee to the extent of Rs. 13,66,715 for the block period 1986-87 to 1996-97 as made by the AO

High Court Of Gauhati CIT vs. Peerchand Ratanlal Baid (HUF) Section 147, 148, 150, 153, 158BB, 158BC Asst. Year Block period 1986-87 to 1996-97 Ranjan Gogoi & B.K. Sharma, JJ. IT Appeal No. 19 of 2006 15th May, 2009 Counsel Appeared : U. Bhuyan, for the Petitioner : R. Goenka, R.K. Agarwal & M. Talukdar, for …

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether the Tribunal has committed a grave error in rejecting the adjournment application filed by counsel of the appellant/assessee and thereby dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant/assessee ex parte without adjudicating on the merits of the case and without affording another opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee when the paper book filed by counsel of the appellant/assessee already contained the written submissions and the relevant documents were on record before the Tribunal

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Anil Kumar Agrahari vs. CIT Section 254, ITAT Rule 24 Dipak Misra & R.K. Gupta, JJ. IT Appeal No. 39 of 2009 14th May, 2009 Counsel Appeared : Sumit Nema, for the Appellant : Sanjay Lal, for the Revenue. JUDGMENT By the court : Heard Mr. Sumit Nema, learned counsel for …

Madhya Pradesh H.C : the Trial Court as well as the High Court missed to notice s. 292A of the Indian IT Act containing an express bar against the invocation of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act in respect of the offence enumerated in the IT Act

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench Union Of India vs. Smt. Mamta Sethi & Ors. Section 68, 276C, 277, 278B, 279, 292A, Criminal Procedure Code 1973, ss. 24, 24(2), 277 & 377(2); Indian Penal Code, ss. 420 & 511; Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, s. 4 N.K. Mody, J. Criminal Appeal No. 213 of …
Malcare WordPress Security