Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Sec. 139(9)

Section 139, Sec. 139(9), Section 239, Section 240, Section 292B

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether a return filed under the IT Act by a company is mandatorily required to be signed by its managing director under s. 140(c) of the Act or it can be filed by an authorized signatory duly appointed by a resolution of the board of directors ?

Avijit Das / March 11, 2008

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Hind Samachar Ltd. vs. Union Of India & Ors. Section 139(9), 140(c), 239, 240, […]

Sec. 139(9), Sec. 44AB, Section 139, Section 271C, Section 273B

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, for the purpose of attracting of s. 44AB, the receipts of an assessee by way of sale or trading business and receipts for doing the job work can be clubbed for the purpose of finding out whether the limit of Rs. 40 lakhs prescribed for attracting the provisions of s. 44AB is made out ?

Avijit Das / August 2, 2006

High Court Of Rajasthan Bajrang Oil Mills vs. Income Tax Officer Sections 44AB, 139(9), 271B, 273B Asst. Year 1994-95 Rajesh

Sec. 139(5), Sec. 139(9), Section 80HHC

Madras H.C : the Tribunal was right in remanding the matter back to re-examine and decide the issue of allowing deduction under s. 80HHC when the assessee failed to file Form 10CCAC along with the return as prescribed by the statute ?

Avijit Das / July 17, 2006

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Valli Cotton Traders (P) Ltd. Sections 80HHC, 139(5), 139(9) Asst. Year 1993-94 P.D. Dinakaran

Sec. 139(9), Sec. 143(3), Section 143, Section 246

Allahabad H.C : An appeal lay against the order under s. 139(9) before the first appellate authority under s. 246 of the IT Act, 1961, by treating the order under s. 139(9) as virtually an order under s. 143(3)

Avijit Das / April 21, 2006

High Court Of Allahabad CIT vs. U.P. State Food And Essential Commodities Corporation Ltd. Sections 139(9), 143(3), 246(1)(a) Asst. Year

Sec. 139(9), Sec. 143(1)(a), Section 143

Punjab & Haryana H.C : the AO adding a sum of Rs. 1,06,240 to the total income of the assessee as capital gain by way of an adjustment under s. 143(1)(a)

Avijit Das / July 26, 2004

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana O.P. Gupta vs. CIT Sections 139(9), 143(1)(a) Asst. Year 1989-90 N.K. Sud & Adarsh

Sec. 139(9), Section 139

Bombay H.C : Whether the authorities under the IT Act were justified in treating the revised return for the asst. yr. 1991-92 and the original return for the year 1992-93 as invalid under s. 139(9) of the IT Act

Avijit Das / March 4, 2003

High Court Of Bombay Flotech Welding & Cutting Systems Ltd. vs. Chander Singh & Ors. Sections 139(9) Asst. Year 1992-93

Sec. 139(9), Section 139, Section 144, Section 184, Section 185

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether the order passed by AO and directions issued under s. 144A

Avijit Das / February 25, 2003

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh Dhannalal Gulabchand Sethi vs. ITO Sections 139(9), 144, 184, 185 Asst. Year 1998-99 Arun Mishra,

Sec. 139(4), Sec. 139(9), Section 139

Madhya Pradesh H.C : No separate time-limit for furnishing audit report under s. 44AB has been prescribed in the Act, 1961, for Government/non-Government organisation in law and in the facts and circumstances of the present case the assessee had ample time to make requisite compliance in terms of s. 44AB of the Act, 1961, in accordance with law before the order p. 7 under s. 139(9) was passed by the AO

Avijit Das / October 22, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd. vs. CIT & ORS. Sections 139(4), 139(9) Asst.

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

Scroll to Top