inspecting Assistant Vs. Jhalani and Co. - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Jun-26-1989

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

LAW: Section 273, Section 215/217, Section 273, Section 273, Section 273, Section 18(1, Section 273, Section 273, Section 273, Section 273, Section 209A, Section 209A, Section 212, Section 209A

CARDINAL: 1, 29, 10-6-1982, 10,000, 18-4-1984, 12,70,740, 31-12-1984, 4-12-1984, 22, 30-6-1982, 6-12-1984, 30-6-1982, 10-6-1982, 29, 28A., 10,000, 2,92,959Advance, 30-12-1984, 97, 11, 11, 3-12-1982, 10, 11,80,000, less than 25, 2, 1, 2, 3, 5, 1, 2, 4, 3A, 10,000

DATE: 7-10-1985, year 1983-84, 6-12-1984, October, 1980, year 1983-84, year 1982-83, year 1983-84, previous year, 20 days, the year, the previous year, year 1983-84, earlier years, year 1983-84, today, 1974, June, 1982, December, 1982, December, 1982, the financial year ended, December, 1982, the assessment year, the 1st day of April, 1970, the month of June, 1982, the month of June, 1982, September, 1982

ORG: the Commissioner of Income-tax (, Co., Nil, M/s. Gedore Tools, Company Law Board, the Company Law Board, Company Law Board, Nil, N.N. Subramania Iyer v. Union of India, ITR, Hon'ble High Court, Assessing, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, the CIT (Appeals, Department, the CIT (Appeals

GPE: New Delhi, asst

TIME: 8-1-1985

MONEY: 3,90,61175 per cent, 100 per cent, 10 per cent, 10 per cent

PRODUCT: 228

ORDINAL: first, second, first, second