265 ITR – taxcaselaw.com

S.C : Whether a penalty imposed under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act and prosecution under s. 276C of the IT Act are simultaneous?

Supreme Court Of India K.C. Builders & Anr. vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Sections 276C, 278B, IPC 34, IPC 120-B, IPC 193, IPC 196, IPC 420 Asst. Year 1983-84, 1984-85, 1985-86, 1986-87 B.N. Agrawal & Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, JJ. Criminal Appeal Nos. 212 & 213 of 1998 28th January, 2004 Counsel Appeared Ajit K. Sinha, …

S.C : The IT Act was first introduced in the country in the year 1922. The said Act was repealed and replaced with the 1961 Act (hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity the said Act). Sec. 5A of the 1922 Act was in pari materia with sub-ss. (1) to (3) of s. 252 as it originally stood

Supreme Court Of India Ajay Gandhi & Anr. vs. B. Singh & Ors. Sections 255(1), 255(5) V.N. Khare, C.J. & S.B. Sinha, J. Transferred Case Nos. 5 & 6 of 1997 5th January, 2004 Counsel Appeared Raju Ramachandran & S. Ganesh with Buddy A. Ranganadhan, A.V. Rangam, J.B. Dadachanji, Rajiv Nanda, C.V.S. Rao, P. Parmeswaran, P.H. …

Madras H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the disputed customs duty payable and funded interest payable to the bank, which liabilities pertain to the earlier years, can be allowed as a deduction in computing the profits under s. 115J of the Act ?

High Court Of Madras CIT vs. Essorpe Mills Ltd. Sections 115J(1A) Asst. Year 1990-91 R. Jayasimha Babu & S.R. Singharavelu, JJ. Tax Case No. 64 of 2000 17th December, 2003 Counsel Appeared K. Subramanian, for the Revenue : P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, for the Assessee JUDGMENT R. Jayasimha Babu, J. : The question referred to us for …

S.C : Aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below in dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff- appellants (hereinafter referred to as the “appellants”), the appellants have come up in this appeal.

Supreme Court Of India R. Kuppayee & Anr. vs. Raja Gounder R.C. Lahoti & Ashok Bhan, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 16757 of 1996 10th December, 2003 Counsel Appeared Gaurav Aggarwal & Prashant Kumar, for the Appellants : R. Soundravardan with K.K. Mani & Ms. Manika Pandey, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Ashok Bhan, J. : Aggrieved by …

Madras H.C : Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee-trust is exempt from wealth-tax under s. 5(1) of the WT Act without considering the provisions of s. 21A(iii) which was brought into effect from 1st April, 1985 ?

High Court Of Madras Director Of Income-Tax (Exemptions) vs. A.V. Narayanan Trust Section 13(1)(d), WT 5(1)(i), WT 21A(iii) Asst. Year 1987-88 & 1988-89 R. Jayasimha Babu & S.R. Singharavelu, JJ. TC Nos. 328 & 329 of 2001 9th December, 2003 Counsel Appeared : J. Nareshkumar, for the Department : None appeared, for the Assessee JUDGMENT R. …

Gauhati H.C : All these appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the respondent-companies for the relevant asst. yrs. 1988-89 to 1991-92.

High Court Of Gauhati CIT vs. George Williamson (Assam) Ltd. Sections 37(1) Asst. Year 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92 P.P. Naolekar, C.J. & I.A. Ansari, J. IT Appeal Nos. 3 of 2002 & 14, 28, 32, 36, 75, 77, 78 & 83 of 2003 4th December, 2003 Counsel Appeared K.P. Sarma & U.C. Bhuyan, for the Revenue …

Calcutta H.C : Petitioner made an application in respect of asst. yrs. 1984-85 and 1987-88 to 1990-91 for waiver of penalty leviable under s. 271(1)(c)(iii) and interest payable under the said Act

High Court Of Calcutta Satish Kapur vs. CIT Sections Art. 226, 154, 246(1)(c), 253(1)(c), 271(1)(c), 273A Asst. Year 1984-85, 1987-88, 1989-90, 1990-91 Aloke Chakrabarti & S.K. Gupta, JJ. GA No. 275 of 2002 & APOT No. 44 of 2002 24th November, 2003 Counsel Appeared J.P. Khaitan, for the Petitioner : Biswanath Samaddar, for the Respondent JUDGMENT …

Madras H.C : The assessment year is 1987-88. The first question is concerned with the interpretation of s. 32AB and as to whether it has been construed too narrowly by the Tribunal.

High Court Of Madras Carborandum Universal Ltd. vs. CIT Sections 32AB, 216 Asst. Year 1987-88 R. Jayasimha Babu & S.R. Singharavelu, JJ. Tax Case No. 72 of 2000 17th November, 2003 Counsel Appeared P.P.S. Janardhana Raja, for the Assessee : K. Subramaniam, for the Revenue JUDGMENT R. Jayasimha Babu, J. : The reference is at the …

Calcutta H.C : Dr. Pal, appearing for the petitioners, contends that this Ordinance is constitutionally bad, as the power of the President under Art. 123 to promulgate the same is conditioned

High Court Of Calcutta Amar Nath Sen vs. Union Of India Sections Art. 123, Art. 323B, National Tax Tribunal Ordinance, 2003 Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. Writ Petn. No. 2102 of 2003 13th November, 2003 Counsel appeared Dr. Pal, for the Petitioner : S.K. Kapur, for the Respondent JUDGMENT Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. : Dr. Pal, appearing …

Karnataka H.C : The said return was filed on 31st March, 1998 and is a voluntary return according to the petitioner and it was filed before issuance of any notice in terms of s. 142 or 148 of the Act

High Court Of Karnataka K.G. Prasad & Anr. vs. CCIT Sections 234A, 234B, 234C Asst. Year 1997-98 R. Gururajan, J. Writ Petn. Nos. 35343 & 35344 of 2003 12th November, 2003 Counsel Appeared R. Rama Murthy, for the Petitioner : M.V. Seshachala, for the Respondents ORDER R. Gururajan, J. : These two petitions involve almost same/similar …

Tag: 265 ITR