Reliance Jute and Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Decided On : Mar-08-1978

Court : Kolkata

LAW: Section 256(1, the I.T. Act, Section 214, Section 141A, Section 214, Section 143(3, Section 214, Section 214.5, Section 246, the I.T. Act, the I.T. Act, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 214, Section 216dealing, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 214, the I.T. Act, Section 16 of the Finance Act, Section 214, Section 214, Section 213, Section 141A, Chapter, Section 214, Section 214 of the Act, Section 246, Section 143(3, the I.T. Act, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 18A(3, Section 22, Section 22, Section 28 of the Act, Section 28, Section 18A(9)(b, Section 18A(3, Section 22(2)of, Section 24B(2, Section 46(1, Section 2(2, Section 24B(1, Section 29, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 214, Section 141A(4, Section 24, Section 214(1A, Section 214(1, Section 214, Section 214, Section 214, Section 214(1A, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 297(2)(d, the I.T. Act, Section 297(2)(d, the I.T. Act, Section 297, Section 34, the I.T. Act, Section 214(1A, Section 229, Section 229, Section 214, Section 214, Section 12, Section 63, Section 69, Section 159(3, Section 237, the I.T. Act, Section 237, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 237, Section 237, the I.T. Act, Section 246, the I.T. Act, Section 214, the I.T. Act

ORG: Sabyasachi Mukharji, Tribunal, AAC, ITO, ITO, AAC, ITO, AAC, AAC, ITO, AAC, ITO, AAC, AAC, AAC, AAC, Tribunal, Tribunal, AAC, Tribunal, CIT, Chap, Govt, inter alia, ITO, AAC, ITO, Parliament, East End Dwellings Co. Ltd., Finsbury Borough Council, AC 109, CIT, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, ITO, ITO, the High Court, the Supreme Court, the High Court, The Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Government, Parliament, Parliament, Parliament, Parliament, Parliament, the Supreme Court, ITO, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Parliament, Legislature, Parliament, Legislature, Reliance, CIT, Bengal Home Industries Association, Shreeniwas & Sons v. ITO, ITO, ITO

DATE: 1961, 1967-68, 3rd January, 1969, February 26, 1969, March 30, 1972, the assessment year 1961-62.3, December 29, 1972, May 30, 1972, 1971, January 27, 1978, 1961, 1961, 1961, 1961, 1968, April 1, 1968, 1967-68, '214, any financial year, the 1st day of April, the assessment year, the financial year, 1961, 1952, 1930, '11, 1922, 1922, 1922, the assessment year 1946-47, 1922, 1922, 1922, 1922, 1961, 1961, 1961, 1961, years, 1922, the year ending on 31st March, 1940, 1922, 1961, '15, 1963, 1961, 1961, 1961, 1961, 1961

CARDINAL: only one, 2, 1,40,260, 79,506, 1,80,136, 7,030, 11,00,000, 141A, 9,746Total, 132, 1979]117ITR603(Cal, 217, 1A, 1A, 1, 213, 1, 1A, 1961.10, One, 1959]35ITR408(SC, 1962]44ITR442(SC, one, eight, one, 1922.13, 1A, 1A, 1, 1A, two, one, 1976]103ITR123(SC, two, 229, 1A, 1A, 48, 181, 1974]96ITR562(Cal, 1A

PERCENT: 55%

PERSON: Rohini Kumar, Asquith, Asquith, S. Teja Singh, Addl, E. Alfred, XVII, Sudhindra Mohan Guha

MONEY: nine per cent

LOC: Govt, Act.12

GPE: Govinddas, J.19

NORP: sums.--Any