Sec. 5(1)(iv)

Sec. 5(1)(iv), Section 5

Andhra Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the provisions of s. 4(1)(b) of the WT Act r/w r. 2 of the WT Rules and the principle decided by the AP High Court in CWT vs. Narendra Ranjalker (1981) 129 ITR 203 (AP) are not applicable in the case of the assessee, who is a minor?

High Court Of Andhra Pradesh Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. N. Balakrishna Sections WT 5(1)(iv), WT 27 Asst. Year 1976-77,

Sec. 2(c), Sec. 5(1)(iv), Section 2, Wealth Tax Act

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside the orders of the authorities below regarding allowability of exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) of the WT Act, 1957, at the stage of determination of net wealth of the AOP in which the assessee was a member, before its allocation amongst the members, for fresh disposal by the WTO in the light of the decision of the Tribunal (Special Bench), Pune, in the case of N.R. Karia vs. WTO (1985) 22 TTJ (Pune) (SB) 13 : (1985) 13 ITD 545 (Pune)(SB) ?

High Court Of Gauhati Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Ramniwas Karwa & Anr. Sections WT 2(c), WT 5(1)(iv), WT RULE

Sec. 2(m), Sec. 4(1)(b), Sec. 5(1)(iv), Section 4, Wealth Tax Act

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper construction of s. 2 (m), s. 4(1)(b), s. 5(1)(iv) of the WT Act, 1957, and r. 2 of the WT Rules, 1957, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the direction of the AAC that exemption of proportionate share of the interest in the building belonging to the firm should be allowed under s. 5(1)(iv) in the hands of the assessee-partner ?

High Court Of Gauhati Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs. Tarachand Agarwalla Section WT 2(m), WT 5(1)(iv), WT 4(1)(b) Asst. Year

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security