Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

Sec. 256(2)

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was legally justified in cancelling the penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961 ?

Avijit Das / August 8, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Milap Textile Mills Section 256(2) Asst. Year 1980-81 N.N. Mathur & H.R. Panwar, JJ. […]

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Madhya Pradesh H.C : This is an application under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) as it stood before the amendment of 1999, praying for calling reference from the Tribunal, Indore Bench, for resolution of the question, as extracted in para 4 of the application

Avijit Das / July 18, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench CIT vs. Indore Plastics (P) Ltd. Sections 256(2) Deepak Verma & N.K.

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in directing to grant registration of the firm for the asst. yrs. 1983-84 and 1984-85 and continuation of registration for the asst. yrs. 1986-87 and 1987-88 ?

Avijit Das / July 17, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench CIT vs. Vijaykumar Rajendrakumar & Co. Sections 256(2) Asst. Year 1983-84, 1984-85,

Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in allowing claim of bad debt amounting to Rs. 44,38,276 ? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that there was no collusive agreement between the assessee-firm and the debtor company ?

Avijit Das / July 16, 2002

High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench CIT vs. Nand Manahor Agencies Sections 256(2) Deepak Verma & N.K. Jain,

Sec. 139(8), Sec. 256(2), Section 217, Section 256

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in cancelling interest charged under s. 139(8) and under s. 217 at the time of framing assessment under ss. 143(3) and 147 by holding that Expln. 2 to s. 139(8) is not applicable ?

Avijit Das / May 31, 2002

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Inderjeet Bedi Sections 139(8), 217, 256(2) Asst. Year 1985-86 Jawahar Lal Gupta

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Rajasthan H.C : The assessee filed a return for the asst. yr. 1973-74, showing total income at Rs. 25,700 from the interest and rent.

Avijit Das / May 10, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan Maharana Bhagwat Singh vs. CIT Sections 256(2) Asst. Year 1973-74 N.N. Mathur & D.N. Joshi, JJ.

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.

Sec. 133A, Sec. 245C, Sec. 256(2), Section 131, Section 254, Section 256

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was legally justified in entertaining the ground relating to impounding of the books of account under s. 131 in respect of an appeal filed against order passed under s. 144 of the IT Act, 1961 ?

Avijit Das / March 22, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Mool Chand Salecha Sections 131, 133A, 245C, 245F, 254, 256(2), 272A(1)(c), Art. 226 Asst.

Sec. 256(2), Sec. 40A(3)

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in law in laying a general rule that as and when the payee asks for payment in cash, that by itself becomes an exceptional circumstance leading to exemption from the requirement of s. 40A(3) of the IT Act, 1961 ?

Avijit Das / March 18, 2002

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Nikko Auto Ltd. Sections 40A(3), 256(2), Rule 6DD(J) Asst. Year 1989-90 Jawahar

Sec. 256(2), Section 256

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in holding in law that the expenditure of Rs. 35,207 incurred for the purchase of T.V. set for the staff was a revenue expenditure ?

Avijit Das / February 22, 2002

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Wolkem (P) Ltd. Co. Section 256(2) Asst. Year 1988-89 N.N. Mathur & D.N. Joshi,

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 40 Next →

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

Scroll to Top