Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Asstt. Cit Vs. Sohanlal Shantilal and Bros.

Decided On : Mar-27-2002

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

LAW: section 201(1A, section 201(1A, the Income Tax Act, ITR 230, ITR 818, section 201(IA, section 194A, section 201(1A, section 201(IA, the Finance Act, the Income Tax Act, the Income Tax Act, section 201(1A

CARDINAL: six, 137, 140, 245, 200, 213, 201(1A, 1-4-1962, 1A, 1, 201(1A, 167, 209, 201, 1A, 161

ORG: TDS, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, CIT, Development Bank Ltd., CIT, New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Reliance, Income Tax, Rathi Gum Industries, Madhya Pradesh High Court, Rathi Gum Industries, Kerala High Court, CIT, the Calcutta High Court, Grindlays Bank Ltd., CIT, ITR, Rathi Gum Industries, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, CIT, Rathi Gum Industries, ITR, Registry, Sec, the Central Government, The Hon'ble Kerala High Court, CIT, Sec, CIT, KK Engg.Co., CTR, Rathi Gum Industries, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court, CIT, Rathi Gum Industries, the Hon'ble High Court, the Commissioner (Appeals, Madhya Pradesh High Court, CIT, ITR, the Hon'ble Kerala High Court

DATE: 1961, 1982, 1983, 2000, 1993, 1995, 2001, 2001, 1961, 1987

GPE: Tribunal, Jaipur

PERSON: Jaipur Bench, Dhanalakshmy Wvg, Jaipur Bench, Dhanalakshmy Wvg, Kanan Devan Hill Produce Co. Ltd.

PRODUCT: 441, 201

MONEY: fifteen per cent, 12 per cent

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //