Madras High Court

Section 171

Madras H.C : All the above-mentioned writ petitions which involve questions relating to the validity, scope and interpretation of the provisions of s. 171(9) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), which was introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1980, are disposed of by this common judgment. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by the several counsel appearing in these petitions, it would be enough to refer to the admitted facts in W.P. Nos. 994 and 995 of 1984.

/

High Court Of Madras M.V. Valliappan & Ors. vs. CIT Sections 171(a), Art. 226 M.N. Chandurkar, C.J. & T. Sathiadev,

Section 143

Madras H.C : For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioner herein prays that this Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the respondent to issue certified copy of the revised assessment order for 1985-86 and pass such other further order or orders as this Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case and render justice.

/

High Court Of Madras Jayaramu Ammal vs. Agricultural Income Tax Officer Section 143 Nainar Sundaram, J. WP No. 12852 of

Sec. 276C, Section 163, Section 276, Section 277, Section 278

Madras H.C : The Union of India, represented by the Second ITO, City Circle 11, Madras-34, has preferred these revisions under ss. 397 and 401, CrPC, for setting aside the order passed by the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences-II), Egmore, Madras, in C.C. Nos. 232, 231 and 233 of 1984, discharging the respondents of offences under s. 120B r/w ss. 193 and 196, Indian Penal Code, on the ground that the above sections will not apply since the ITO had not been declared to be a Court under s. 195(3), CrPC.

/

High Court Of Madras Union Of India vs. Gopal Engineering Works & Ors. Sections 276C, 277, 278, 136 Padmini Jesudurai,

Scroll to Top
Malcare WordPress Security