Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd.

Decided On : Sep-03-1975

Court : Gujarat

Notice (8): Undefined index: topics [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 36]
Warning (2): Invalid argument supplied for foreach() [APP/View/Case/meta.ctp, line 39]

LAW: section 81(1, section 110, section 66, section 110, section 67, section 66, section 110, section 66, section 110, section 66, section 110, section 5, Section 4, Central Act, section 5, Section 14, section 28, section 29, section 28, section 30, section 36, section 37, Chapter VII.'Chapter VII, Chapter, section 81 to 85C, section 81, Section 81, section 30 to, section 30, section 81, Chapter VII, section 2, section 14, Chapter VII, section 10(2, section 10(2, the Division Bench, section 10(2, section 10, section 10(2, section 10(2, section 37, Section 10(2, section 10, section 81(1, section 66, section 110, section 81(1, section 81(1, section 110, section 110, the English Act, section 10(2, section 10(2)(xv, section 81(1, section 81(1, Chapter VII, section 81(1

CARDINAL: three, three, three, 100, 24, 139, three, 100, 61,029, 89,976, 66, 67, 67, 2, 89,976, 1, 49,353, 89,976, three, 25,460, 89,976, 24, 2,29,560, 61,730, 1,00,617, 27,000, two, 67, 2, 1,00,617, 27,000, 100, 1, 139, 2,85,390, 1,64,667, 76,931, three, 1,64,667, 28, 30, 1, 30, 66, fifteen thousand, 110, fifteen thousand, fifteen thousand, three, fifteen thousand, fifteen thousand, 37, only two, 1, 2, one, 1974]97ITR140(Guj, two, 1, 2, 3, 1966]59ITR763(SC, two, 1968]67ITR436(Bom, 1973]90ITR348(Bom, 1937]5ITR97(Mad, 1937]5ITR97(Mad, 21, 472, 6, 636, 2(d, 7(2, 78,556, two, 41,262, 41,262, 15, two, 3, 21, 472, 6, 636, 21, 472, 6, 21, 472, 6, 80, 21, 472, 6, 636, 21, 472, 6, 21, 472, 6, 636, 40, 81, 1968]67ITR436(Bom, 1966]59ITR763(SC, 4,86,228-6, 39,70,000, 28, 4,85,228-6, 23, 23, only one, 1937]5ITR97(Mad, 1971]82ITR452(SC, 454, one, two, 1, 2, 455, 1937]5ITR97(Mad, 1970]76ITR603(Cal, two, 15,63,504, 4, 1,23,719, 1,23,719, 1951]19ITR623(Cal, 1,23,719, 1951]19ITR623(Cal, 665, only one, 1,23,719, 1,23,719, two, 1,23,719, one, 21, 472, 6, 3,12,699, 517, 21, 6, 6, fifteen thousand, fifteen thousand, fifteen thousand, 28, 29, 30, two, two, three, 66, 110, two, two, 66, 110, 100, 24, 139, three

PERSON: Sabarkantha Zilla, Shah, Shah, Shah, Chellappa, Schedule C, Schedule D, Wright M.R., Hills, Hills, Wright M.R., Wright M.R., Green L. J., Hills, Wright M.R., Mitchell, Sikri J., Wright M.R., Hegde J., Nusserwanji, Nusserwanji, Venkatarama Ayyar J., Shah, Wright, Thankerton, No.(2, No.(2

GPE: Himatnagar, India, the United Kingdom, London, London, New Zealand, London, Salisbury, L.J., L.J., England, Thankerton, India, Green L.J., England, England, Thankerton, Green L.J., Eden v. Ross, Green L.J., Chellappa, Chellappa, India, Bombay, Pakistan, Bombay, Bombay, Bombay, Pakistan, Karachi, India, Bombay, Bombay, India, India, Karachi, Karachi, Bombay, Karachi, Bombay, Bombay, Bombay, Bombay, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, India, Karachi, Green L.J., Green L.J., Green L.J., India

DATE: years, 1974, year 1964-65, 1974, year 1965-66, 1974, year 1966-67, 1974, 1964-65, the assessment year 1965-66, September 16, 1964, February 6, 1969, 20, 816, 1961, the previous year, the assessment year 1964-65, 1965-66, the earlier year, 1974, 1974, the assessment year is, 1966-67, this particular year, 1,58,339, 1,58,339, the earlier two years, this particular year, 1968, 1961, that year, the previous year, any previous year, the previous year, 81 to 86, 1967, April 1, 1968, years, April 1, 1968, April 1, 1968, '81, the relevant years, 37, 1961, April 1, 1968, 1971]80ITR72(Cal, 1922, 1938, 1938, 1918, 1930, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1922, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1938, 1961, 1933, the relevant year, the year, 1922, 1922, 1970]78ITR209(MP, 1922, 1961, 1953]24ITR24(Bom, annual, the relevant year, the year, 1953]24ITR24(Bom, 1956]29ITR661(SC, annual, 1956]29ITR661(SC, 1938, 1938, 1922, 1956]29ITR661(SC, 4,94,879, 1938, 1938, 1961, 1974, 1974, 1974

ORG: Appellate, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Appellate, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Appellate, Tribunal, Tribunal, inter alia, Act, this High Court, the Supreme Court, the Calcutta High Court, Darbhanga Marketing Co. Ltd., the Bombay High Court, Industrial Investment Trust Co. Ltd., New Great Insurance Co. Ltd., the Supreme Court, the House of Lords, Hughes, Taxes, Bank of New Zealand, The Bank of New Zealand, War Loan, India Government Stock, the House of Lords, the Court of Appeal, the India Government Stock, the Court of Appeal, the India Stock, Crown, House, Crown, Crown, Crown, Legislature, the House of Lords, the House of Lords, the Court of Appeal, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, the Court of Appeal, the House of Lords, Crown, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, the Supreme Court, Indian Bank Ltd., Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Hughes v Bank of New Zealand, the Supreme Court, Crown, Indian Bank Ltd., the Supreme Court, Indian Bank Ltd., Indian Bank Ltd., Industrial Investment Trust Co. Ltd., the Bombay High Court, the Bombay High Court, the Supreme Court, Indian Bank Ltd., Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd., the Supreme Court, the Bombay High Court, the Bombay High Court, the Supreme Court, Indian Bank Ltd., the Bombay High Court, Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd., the Supreme Court, Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd., the Supreme Court, Tribunal, Supreme Court, The Supreme Court, Indian Bank of Ltd., the Calcutta High Court, Hanuman Sugar & Industries Ltd., the Supreme Court, Indian Bank Ltd., the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the Bombay High Court, C. Parekh & Company, Karachi, Karachi, Karachi, the Bombay High Court, Karachi, Bombay, Karachi, Karachi, the Bombay High Court, the Karachi Branch, the Bombay High Court, the Calcutta High Court, Birla Brothers Ltd., Chagla C.J., the Calcutta High Court, Tribunal, High Court, Birla Brothers Ltd., the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, C. Parakh & Co., the Bombay High Court, the India Income-tax Act, Karachi, Karachi, Karachi, Karachi, Karachi, C. Parakh & Co., Hughes v. bank, Indian Bank Ltd., the General Government, Karachi, C. Parakh & Co., the Supreme Court, Karachi, Karachi, Bombay, the Bombay High Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Karachi, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, the Master of the Rolls, the House of Lords, the Court of Appeal, the House of Lords, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand, Hughes v. Bank of New Zealand

ORDINAL: second, first, first, second, second, first, sixth, first, second, second, first, first, first, Secondly, Secondly, first, secondly

NORP: Indian, South Indian, Indian, Indian, South Indian, Indian, Indian, Indian

MONEY: 25 per cent, 5 per cent, 5 per cent, 5 per cent, 20 per cent, 20 per cent, 20 per cent

PRODUCT: the Full Bench, The Full Bench, Crown

FAC: the Governor-General-in-Council

View Full Judgment


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