Semantic Analysis by spaCy
Debichand Mohallal Vs. Income-tax Officer
Decided On : Mar-16-1994
Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
LAW: Section 143(3, Section 68, Section 68, Section 131, Section 131, Section 131, Section 131 Issued, Section 131, Section 24
CARDINAL: 1, 1, 19,684, 19,667, 19,717, 9)(4, 19,667, 6-11-1987, 6-11-1987, three, one, one, 154, 151, 150, 17, 154, 3, 159, 783, 83, 162, 484, 130, 145, 183, 103ITR 344, three, 1978, 114, 689
ORG: not.2, ITO, Nandita Kumari Agarwal Rs, ITO, ITO, ITO, ITO, M.P. Agarwal, ITO, Lordship Justice, CIT, Hanuman Agarwal, the Patna High Court, CIT v. Bahri Bros., CIT, ITR, the Supreme Court, CIT, SC, ITO, Rattan Lai, ITR, SC, ITO, the Supreme Court, Sarogi Credit Corpn.v, CIT, the Calcutta High Court, Shankar Industries, CIT
DATE: 13)(2, the same day, the year, 1985, 1984, 1985, 244 22, 1986, 11986, 1981, 61, 1984, 25, 1965, 1976
PERSON: Shri Jain, Jain, Rule 46A, Jain, S.K. Jha, Addl, Pat, Addl, Orissa Corpn.(P., Das, K.D. Arora v., Pat, Das, Kanhaiyalal, Jain, Das, Pat
GPE: Counsel
ORDINAL: first, first, fourth, third
PRODUCT: 349