255 ITR Archives - taxcaselaw.com

S.C : The constitutional validity of ss. 269SS and 271D of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), is challenged

Supreme Court Of India Assistant Director Of Inspection (Investigation) vs. Kum. A.B.Shanthi Sections 269SS, 271D, Art. 14, Sch. VII, List I, Entry 82 R.P. Sethi & K.G. Balakrishnan, JJ. Criminal Appeal No. 601 of 1992 3rd May, 2002 Counsel Appeared Soli J. Sorabjee, S. Ganesh & T.L.V. Iyer with Rajiv Nanda, B.V.B. Das, Manish Singhvi, P. …

S.C : Can an AO while assessing a company for income-tax under s. 115J of the IT Act question the correctness of the P&L a/c prepared by the assessee-company and certified by the statutory auditors of the company as having been prepared in accordance with the requirements of Parts II and III of Sch. VI to the Companies Act ?

Supreme Court Of India Apollo Tyres Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 32AB, 73, Expln., 115J Asst. Year 1988-89 S.P. Bharucha, C.J.; N. Santosh Hegde & D.M. Dharmadhikari, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6100 of 1998 2nd May, 2002 Counsel Appeared G.C. Sharma with Rajiv Tyagi, Anoop Sharma, R.K. Raghavan & Ms. Anjali Sharma, for the Appellant : M.L. …

Delhi H.C : The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the CIT Delhi-I, dt. 4th March, 2002, holding that the ITO, Ward 2(4) has jurisdiction to deal with the case.

High Court Of Delhi B.R. Industries Ltd. vs. CIT Section 120 Dalveer Bhandari & Vikramajit Sen, JJ. Civil Writ Petn. No. 1742 of 2002 1st May, 2002 Counsel Appeared Pradeep Manglik, for the Petitioner : Sanjiv Khanna, for the Respondent JUDGMENT DALVEER BHANDARI, J. : The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the CIT Delhi-I, …

Delhi H.C : The petitioner has preferred this writ petition against the order dt. 24th Aug., 2000, passed by CIT by which a certificate in Form 3 of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme (in short ‘KVSS’), 1998, for the asst. yrs. 1989-90 and 1990-91 was rejected.

High Court Of Delhi Ivory Mart vs. Union Of India & Ors. Sections 1998FA(No. 2) 89, 1998FA(No. 2) 90 Asst. Year 1989-90, 1990-91 Dalveer Bhandari & Vikramajit Sen, JJ. Civil Writ Petn. No. 5644 of 2000 16th April, 2002 Counsel Appeared O.S. Bajpai, Amit Shukla & Ajay Jha, for the Petitioner : J.R. Goel with Ajay …

Gauhati H.C : Whether the refund by the Director of State Lotteries to the organising agent of the prize money from the unsold tickets of lotteries and unclaimed prizes attract the provisions of s. 194B of the IT Act, 1961 ?

High Court Of Gauhati Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. vs. Director Of State Lotteries & Anr. Sections 2(24)(ix), 194B R.S. Mongia, C.J. & Amitava Roy, J. Writ Appeal Nos. 232 & 242 of 1999 4th April, 2002 Counsel Appeared K.P. Sarma & U. Bhuyan, for the Appellant : B.K. Sharma, B.P. Todi & P. …

S.C : Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order, dt. 22nd June, 2001 passed by the High Court of Madras in Criminal Revision O.P. Nos. 14209 of 1998 and 11832 of 2000, the appellants have preferred these appeals by special leave.

Supreme Court Of India Nirmal & Navin (P) Ltd. & Ors. vs. D. Ravindran Sections 245H, 245-I Asst. Year 1985-86 M.B. Shah & Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, JJ. Criminal Appeal Nos. 439 & 440 of 2002 4th April, 2002 Counsel Appeared Joseph Vellapally with Shri Narain, Sandeep Narain & Mrs. Anjali for S. Narain & Co., for …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : The AO had disallowed the claim on the ground that Som Nath who had allegedly made the deposit had not been produced.

High Court Of Punjab & Haryana Income Tax Officer vs. Taran Taran Steel Sales & Ors. Sections 276C, 277 Jawahar Lal Gupta & N.K. Sud, JJ. CRL. Misc. No. 297 of 2001 1st April, 2002 Counsel Appeared R.P. Sawhney with Salil Bali, for the Appellant : B.P. Singla, for the Respondent JUDGMENT JAWAHAR LAL GUPTA, J. …

Gujarat H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that at the time of the death of the deceased Shri Karansinhji Fatehsinhji of Sagbara, no property passed which was part of the ‘Sagbara Estate’ and consequently on estate duty in respect thereof was payable ?

High Court Of Gujarat Controller Of Estate Duty vs. Pratapsinhji Ramsinhji Sections ED 5, ED 6 R.K. Abichandani & Kundan Singh, JJ. ED Ref. No. 4 of 1987 22nd March, 2002 Counsel Appeared B.B. Naik, for the Revenue : S.N. Soparkar with Mrs. Swati Soparkar and M.K. Kaji, for the Respondent JUDGMENT R.K. ABICHANDANI, J. : …

S.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-firm is an industrial undertaking eligible for deduction under ss. 80HH, 80-I and 80-J of the IT Act, 1961?

Supreme Court Of India Sacs Eagles Chicory vs. CIT Sections 80HH, 80-I, 80J Asst. Year 1981-82 S.P. Bharucha,C.J.; N. Santosh Hegde & Arijit Pasayat, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 5877 of 1999 21st March, 2002 Counsel Appeared R. Venkataraman with V. Ramasubramanian, for the Appellant : S. Ganesh with Rajiv Tyagi, B.V. Balaram Das & Ms. Sushma …

Gauhati H.C : The aforesaid exemption certificate will not be applicable in the case of deduction of tax from profits and gains from the business of trading in alcoholic liquor, forest produce and scrap under s. 206C of the Act.

High Court Of Gauhati Sing Killing vs. Income Tax Officer & Ors. Sections 10(26), 206C Ranjan Gogoi, J. Civil Rule No. 3278 of 1994 21st March, 2002 Counsel Appeared Dr. A.K. Saraf with S. Saikia, K.K. Gupta, D. Baruah & S.K. Agarwal, for the Petitioner : U. Bhuyan, for the Respondent JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J. : …

Tag: 255 ITR