Tag: 249 ITR

S.C : Property bearing No. N-84, Greater Kailash I, New Delhi, was agreed to be sold by one K.S.R. Chari & Smt. Chari who were permanently residing at Bangalore to Ms. Shashi Sehgal.

Supreme Court Of India Appropriate Authority & Ors. vs. Shashi Sehgal & Ors. Sections 269UC, 279UD S. Rajendra Babu & K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6052 of 1998 10 October 2001 Counsel Appeared Ms. Sushma Suri, for the Appellants : P.K. Jain & Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, for the Respondents JUDGMENT RAJENDRA BABU, J. : Property …
Read More...

S.C : The Appropriate Authority by an order made on 30th Jan., 1994 under s. 269UD ordered the purchase by the Central Government of the said property for the sale consideration mentioned in the agreement to sell.

Supreme Court Of India Appropriate Authority & Anr. vs. R.C. Chawla & Ors. Sections 269UC, 269UD S. Rajendra Babu & K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6049 of 1998 10th May, 2001 Counsel Appeared Shail Kumar Dwivedi, for the Appellants : Geetanjali Mohan, Hari Shankar & Navin Chawla, for the Respondents JUDGMENT RAJENDRA BABU, J. : …
Read More...

S.C : Property bearing No. N-84, Greater Kailash I, New Delhi, was agreed to be sold by one K.S.R. Chari & Smt. Chari who were permanently residing at Bangalore to Ms. Shashi Sehgal.

Supreme Court Of India Appropriate Authority & Ors. vs. Shashi Sehgal & Ors. Sections 269UC, 279UD S. Rajendra Babu & K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6052 of 1998 10th May, 2001 Counsel Appeared Ms. Sushma Suri, for the Appellants : P.K. Jain & Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, for the Respondents JUDGMENT RAJENDRA BABU, J. : Property …
Read More...

S.C : An agreement to sell was entered into on 6th May, 1994, by respondent No. 3 with respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in respect of property bearing municipal No. C-590, Defence Colony, New Delhi, for a total sale consideration of Rs. 80 lacs.

Supreme Court Of India Appropriate Authority & Anr. vs. R.C. Chawla & Ors. Sections 269UC, 269UD S. Rajendra Babu & K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6049 of 1998 10th May, 2001 Counsel Appeared Shail Kumar Dwivedi, for the Appellants : Geetanjali Mohan, Hari Shankar & Navin Chawla, for the Respondents JUDGMENT RAJENDRA BABU, J. : …
Read More...

S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the difference of Rs. 8,21,950 on the sale of the jewellery by the assessee to its 12 wholly-owned subsidiary companies was not liable to gift-tax under the provisions of the GT Act 1958.

Supreme Court On India Reva Investment (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Gift Tax Section 4(1)(a) Asst. year 1976-77 S.P. Bharucha & D.P. Mohapatra, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 1934 of 1998 2nd May, 2001 Counsel Appeared R.F. Nariman with P.H. Parekh, Sameer Parekh & Ms. Deepmala Ranganathan, for the Appellant : Harish N. Salve with Rajiv Tyagi …
Read More...

S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that the difference of Rs. 8,21,950 on the sale of the jewellery by the assessee to its 12 wholly-owned subsidiary companies was not liable to gift-tax under the provisions of the GT Act 1958.

Supreme Court On India Reva Investment (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner Of Gift Tax Section 4(1)(a) Asst. year 1976-77 S.P. Bharucha & D.P. Mohapatra, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 1934 of 1998 2nd May, 2001 Counsel Appeared R.F. Nariman with P.H. Parekh, Sameer Parekh & Ms. Deepmala Ranganathan, for the Appellant : Harish N. Salve with Rajiv Tyagi …
Read More...

Calcutta H.C : Notice dt. 22nd June, 1979, issued by the respondent-authority under s. 263 of the IT Act served on the assessee, the petitioner above named, has been impugned before me in this writ petition.

High Court Of Calcutta Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. Sections 263(1), Explanation Asst. Year 1974-75 Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. C.R. No. 5983 of 1979 28th March, 2001 Counsel Appeared Dr. Debi Prasad Pal, J.P. Khaitan, Ajoy Kumar Dey & S. Mukherjee, for the Petitioner : Rupendra Nath Mitra & Md. Nizamuddin, …
Read More...

Calcutta H.C : Notice dt. 22nd June, 1979, issued by the respondent-authority under s. 263 of the IT Act served on the assessee, the petitioner above named, has been impugned before me in this writ petition.

High Court Of Calcutta Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. Sections 263(1), Explanation Asst. Year 1974-75 Ashim Kumar Banerjee, J. C.R. No. 5983 of 1979 28th March, 2001 Counsel Appeared Dr. Debi Prasad Pal, J.P. Khaitan, Ajoy Kumar Dey & S. Mukherjee, for the Petitioner : Rupendra Nath Mitra & Md. Nizamuddin, …
Read More...
Malcare WordPress Security