Skip to content

taxcaselaw.com

My account

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

taxcaselaw.com

Cart
Checkout
My account
Shop

254 ITR

Sec. 144B, Section 144

Delhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in holding that the second draft order which was sent to the assessee before the date of normal limitation was an invalid order ?

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Sitaram Jaipuria (HUF) Sections 144B, GNRL CL 13(2), GNRL CL 21 S.B. Sinha, C.J. […]

Section 4, Section 5

Delhi H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that damages or any part thereof for illegal occupation of the premises accrued to the appellant though the claim therefor was yet to be adjudicated finally and was pending disposal before the Hon’ble High Court ?

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Pal Properties (I) (P) Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr. Sections 4, 5, 194-I, Explanation Asst. year

Sec. 36(1)(iii)

Delhi H.C : Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the “Tribunal”) was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 10 lacs made on account of interest-free loan/advance of Rs. 47,67,740 given by the assessee to a sister concern.

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi CIT vs. Motor General Finance Ltd. Section 36(1)(iii) S.B. Sinha, C.J. & A.K. Sikri, J. IT

Delhi H.C : According to the appellant as its income for the asst. yr. 1989-90 was below taxable limit, it did not file any return under s. 139(1) or s. 139(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (in short, the ‘Act’).

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Makhan Singh Gurcharan Singh (HUF) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Section 147, CPC 151 Asst.

Sec. 234A, Section 234

Delhi H.C : The petitioners earned substantial capital gains for the asst. yr. 1995-96 for which the return was due to be filed on 31st Oct., 1995.

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Dr. Prannoy Roy & Anr. vs. CIT & Anr. Section 234A Asst. Year 1995-96 S.B. Sinha,

Delhi H.C : The appellant is an HUF. According to the appellant as its income for the asst. yr. 1989-90 was below taxable limit, it did not file any return under s. 139(1) or s. 139(2) of the IT Act, 1961

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Makhan Singh Gurcharan Singh (HUF) vs. Assistant Commissionerof Income Tax Section 147, CPC 151 Asst. Year

Section 4, Section 5

Delhi H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that damages or any part thereof for illegal occupation of the premises accrued to the appellant though the claim therefor was yet to be adjudicated finally and was pending disposal before the Hon’ble High Court ?

Avijit Das / December 21, 2001

High Court Of Delhi Pal Properties (I) (P) Ltd. vs. CIT & Anr. Sections 4, 5, 194-I, Explanation Asst. year

Income Tax Case Laws

S.C : The only question that we are concerned with relates to the correct interpretation to be placed upon the phrase “on which the appropriate amount of duty of excise has already been paid”

Avijit Das / December 12, 2001

Supreme Court Of India Collector Of Central Excise vs. Dhiren Chemical Industries S.P. Bharucha, C.J.; Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri U.C.

Sec. 256(2), Sec. 271(1)(c ), Section 256, Section 271

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty despite the fact as observed by the JM that the assessee revised the return only when investigations were started by the Department and another fact that the assessee had no funds to purchase the demand drafts as mentioned by the AO in the assessment order which was before the Tribunal ?

Avijit Das / December 7, 2001

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana CIT vs. Guru Ram Dass Fruit & Vegetable Agency Sections 256(2), 271(1)(c) Asst. Year

Sec. 32(1)(iii), Sec. 37(1), Sec. 43(3), Sec. 43(6), Section 32

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interest paid under s. 139(8) of the IT Act, 1961, is to be allowed as a deduction under s. 80V and s. 37(1) of the IT Act, 1961?

Avijit Das / December 6, 2001

High Court Of Madras The Guindy Machine Tools (P) Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 32(1)(iii), 37(1), 43(3), 43(6), 80V Asst. Year

Post pagination

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 19 Next →

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

Scroll to Top