263 ITR Archives - taxcaselaw.com

S.C : This appeal by special leave has been preferred against the judgment and order dt. 12th April, 1993 of High Court of Karnataka by which the petition preferred by the respondents under s. 482 Cr.PC was allowed and the criminal complaint filed against them under ss. 276C, 277 and 278 read with s. 278B of the IT Act

Supreme Court Of India Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. vs. Velliappa Textiles Ltd. & Ors. Sections 2(31), 276C, 277, 278, 278B, 279 Asst. Year 1985-86 S. Rajendra Babu, B.N. Srikrishna & G.P. Mathur, JJ. Crl. Appeal No. 142 of 1994 16th September, 2003 Counsel Appeared T.L.V. Iyer with G. Venkatesh Rao & B.Krishna Prasad, …

S.C : The appellant and respondents Nos. 4 and 5 were applicants in response to the advertisement. Though respondent No. 4 was not qualified on the last date for submission of application, he was permitted to attend and appear for the written test. However, on the date of interview he was eligible.

Supreme Court Of India M.A. Murthy vs. State Of Karnataka & Ors. Sections Art. 141 Doraiswamy Raju & Arijit Pasayat, JJ. Civil Appeal Nos. 6913 & 6914 of 2003 2nd September, 2003 Counsel Appeared R. Mohan with Kashi Vishweshar & G. Ramakrishna Prasad, for the Appellant : Mrs. Lalita Kaushik, Naresh Kaushik, Ms. Shilpa Chohan, Sanjay …

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in confirming the order of the first appellate authority that the transport subsidy does not come within the ambit of taxable income ?

High Court Of Gauhati DCIT vs. Assam Asbestos Ltd. Sections 4, 37(1) P.P. Naolekar, C.J. & Amitava Roy, J. IT Appeal No. 4 of 2000 30th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared U. Bhuyan, for the Appellant : Dr. A.K. Saraf & S.K. Agarwal, for the Respondent JUDGMENT P.P. Naolekar, C.J. : In response to a notice issued …

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, addition of an amount of Rs. 4,00,000 only on the basis of statement made by the assessee under s. 132(4), without taking into consideration the retraction of the confession made by the letters dt. 24th Dec., 1992, and 20th Feb., 1995, is in accordance with law ?

High Court Of Gauhati Greenview Restaurant vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Sections 132(4), 143(3) Asst. Year 1992-93, 1993-94 P.P. Naolekar, C.J. & Amitava Roy, J. IT Appeal Nos. 22 & 23 of 2002 30th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared Dr. A.K. Saraf & D. Baruah, for the Appellant : K.P. Sharma, for the Respondent JUDGMENT AMITAVA …

Bombay H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that even if there is no positive ‘Average adjusted total income’ under Expln. (ii) to s. 44C of the IT Act, 1961, the provisions of cl. (a) of s. 44C are applicable and, consequently, no deduction was allowable ?

High Court Of Bombay American Bureau Of Shipping vs. CIT Sections 44C Asst. Year 1977-78 S.H. Kapadia & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 477 of 1987 24th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared F.V. Irani, for the Applicant : R.V. Desai, P.S. Jetly & Mrs. S.V. Bharucha, for the Respondent JUDGMENT S.H. Kapadia, J. : At the …

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, submission of the return under the Amnesty Scheme of 1985-86 without pre depositing the tax, the assessee is entitled to get benefit of the amnesty scheme of 1985-86 ?

High Court Of Gauhati Sri Jnanananda Sharma Pathak vs. CIT & Anr. P.P. Naolekar, C.J. & I.A. Ansari, J. IT Appeal No. 3 of 2000 21st July, 2003 Counsel Appeared K.H. Choudhury & U.K. Barthakur, for the Appellant : U. Bhuyan, for the Respondents JUDGMENT P. P. Naolekar, C. J. : The appeal was admitted on …

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in treating the amount of Rs. 1,43,89,055 as capital reserve forming part of the capital of the assessee under r. 1(iii) of the Second Schedule to the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964, r/w Expln. 1 to r. 2 of the said Second Schedule ?

High Court Of Gauhati CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. Sections SURTAX Sch. II, RR. 1(iii), 2 D. Biswas & I.A. Ansari, JJ. IT Appeal No. 6 of 2000 17th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared U. Bhuyan, for the Appellant : Dr. A.K. Saraf with S.K. Agarwal, for the Respondent JUDGMENT D. Biswas, J. : This appeal …

Gauhati H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A) deleting the penalty of Rs. 4,50,000 imposed on the respondent under s. 271D of the Act ?

High Court Of Gauhati CIT vs. Bhagwati Prasad Bajoria (HUF) Sections 269SS, 271D, 273B Asst. Year 1996-97 P.P. Naolekar, C.J. & T. Vaiphei, J. IT Appeal No. 7 of 2001 17th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared K.P. Pathak & U. Bhuyan, for the Appellant : N. Choudhury, S.C. Koyal & S.P. Sarma, for the Respondent JUDGMENT p.p. …

Gauhati H.C : The tenor of the pleadings made in the present bunch of writ petitions and the oral arguments advanced by learned counsels for the writ petitioners would go to show that the main grievance of the writ petitioners is in respect of the detention of the vehicles carrying tea at inter-State check posts, on the ground of non-production of the agricultural IT clearance certificate under s. 47A of the Agrl. IT Act, 1939 (as amended).

High Court Of Gauhati George Williamson (Assam) Ltd., vs. State Of Assam & Ors. Section Assam Agrl. IT 47A Ranjan Gogoi J. W.P. (C) Nos. 225, 689, 1944, 1447, 1940, 1945, 992, 131, 55, 1942, 1943, 1939, 133, 132, 993, 1941, 2746, 2749, 11, 154, 434, 229, 227, 226, 3125, 2747, 1446, 222 & 2783 of …

Bombay H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing the AO to allow depreciation on the assets the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under s. 11 in the past years ?

High Court Of Bombay CIT vs. Institute Of Banking Personnel Selection Sections 11, 32(1) S. H. Kapadia & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. IT Ref. No. 197 of 1997 9th July, 2003 Counsel Appeared R.V. Desai, for the Applicant : G.S. Pikale, for the Respondent JUDGMENT S.H. Kapadia, J. : This reference is made at the instance of …

Tag: 263 ITR