Semantic Analysis by spaCy
S.A.S.S. Chellappa Chettiar Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras.
Decided On : Jan-15-1937
Court : Chennai
LAW: Section 10(2)(iii, the Income Tax Act, Section 10(1, the Income Tax Act, the Income Tax Act, the Income Tax Act, Section 10(2)(iii
NORP: Hindu, Malay, Indian, Somasundaram, Indian, British, British, British, British, British, British, Somasundaram, English, British, Indian
GPE: India, Burma, Burma, Burma, Kyaiklat, India, Bombay, India, India, Beaumont, India, India, India, Sec, India, India, Bihar, India, England, India, Bihar, Orissa, London, the United Kingdom, India
PERSON: Patanjali Sastri, Thayetmyo, Chettiar, Madras, Burma, Madras, Chettiappa Chettiar, Madras, Lakshmanan Chettiar, Madras, Orissa, Maharajadhiraj of Darbhanga, Ipoh, Chettiar, Madras, Patanjali Sastri, Maxse, Sachindra Mohan Ghosh, Wright, LORD WRIGHT, Wright
CARDINAL: one, 30,963, 17,796, 3,114, four-fifths, 10(2)(iii, four-fifths, one-fifth, 3,114, 10(2)(ix, two, 1, 10(2)(iii, 2, 2, 1, 2, 10, two, one, 10(2)(iii, 10, 10(2, 25, 4, 10(2)(iii, 4, 188, 4, 200, 14, 623, 631, two, 1, 2, only one, 10(2)(iii, 10(2)(iii, 10(2)(iii, 3, 975, 997, 41,262, 998, one, one, 10(2)(iii, 250, 100
DATE: the year of assessment, 1934-1935, the year 1934-1935, the year, the year, 2(1, 1919, 1918, 1936
LOC: Kyaiklat, Kyaiklat, British India, Madras
ORG: Thayetmayo, Sec, Sec, Sec, Court, Sec, Sec, Commissioners, Sec, Sec, this High Court, the Bombay High Court, Income-Tax, Sec, This High Court, Sec, Provident Investment Company Limited, Income-Tax, the Bombay High Court, Sec, Court, Sec, Sec, Sec, the Judicial Committee, Board, Lordships, Maxsees, Ransoms, Income Tax, Ipoh, Ransoms, ec, Sec, Commissioners, Sec, Income Tax, Sec, the Court of Appeal, Hughes, Taxes, Bank of New Zealand (, The Court of Appeal, the Inspector of Taxes, Crown, Lordship, Sec
TIME: 10 of the Act
MONEY: 5 per cent, 3 per cent
QUANTITY: 41,262 pounds
ORDINAL: first, second, first