Skip to content

Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Onkarlal Kachoria Vs. Ito

Decided On : Apr-24-2002

Court : Rajasthan

LAW: section 139(4, section 142(l)(i, section 142(l)(i, section 142(1)(ii, the Income Tax Act, Income Tax Act, section 144/115, section 144, section 145, section 144(l)(b, the Income Tax Act, officer.10.1 Section 144, section 142(l)(i, section 142(l)(i, section 142(l)(i, section 142(l)(i

PERSON: Khatri, Udaipur, Udaipur, Authorised Representative, Authorised Representative

ORG: Commissioner (Appeals, Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, Marsh v. Marsh, AC 217, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals, the Commissioner (Appeals

DATE: year 1994-95, year 1994-95.5, year 1994-95, 139(1, year, year 1994-95, the same day, 1945, the assessment year, year 1994-95, two years

CARDINAL: 17, 31-8-1994, 31-3-1996, 9-3-1995, 17, 31-3-1997, 31-8-1994, 31-3-1996, 31-3-1995, 21-3-1995.4, 31, 18, 17, 40,920, 26, 17, 139(4, 9-3-1995, 31, 17, 25, 47,920, 4,100, 17, 17, 18, 18, 25, 1, 1, 2, 1, 6, 6, 7, 8, 31, 17, 31, 21-3-1995, 31, 17, 17, 31-3-1997, 18

PRODUCT: Ward-1

TIME: 9-3-1995, 9-3-1996

ORDINAL: 14th, first, Secondly

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