Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: finance act 1994 section 73b · Page 1 of about 5 results (0.028 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

May 02 2023

Cc And Ce And St Noida Vs. M/s Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-02-2023

Subject : Service Tax

construction, erection etc. under the category "commercial or industrial constructions services" as referred under Section 65(105)(zzq) of the Finance Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1994’). 2.2 Based on specific intelligence that the respondent had wrongly classified … 7 of 64 8 73A of the Act, 1994 along with the appropriate rate of interest under Sections 73B and 75 of the Act and the penalties be imposed under Sections 77 & 75 of the Act,

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 25 2005

Indian Farmers Fertilizer Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Oct-25-2005

Subject : Service Tax

Reported in : (2006)2STR194

under which demand of Rs. 14,26,231/- of service tax under the provisions of Section 73, Chapter V of Finance Act, 1994, was confirmed, a penalty of equal amount was imposed and payment of interest ordered.2. The authorities below held … cause why service tax amounting to Rs. 14,26,231/- should not be demanded and recovered from them under Section 73B(it should be under Section 73(1) Chapter V) of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest and penalty under

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 07 2004

Ram Chandra Kasliwal Vs. State of Rajasthan and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Decided on : May-07-2004

Subject : CivilProperty

Acts : Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Sections 4; ;Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 - Sections 82; Jaipur Development Authority Act - Sections 45

Reported in : RLW2004(3)Raj1788; 2004(4)WLC17

Regulation of slaughter houses arid tanneries. 243X. Power to impose taxes by and Funds of, the Municipalities.- xxx243Y. Finance Commission. - xxx243Z. Audit of accounts of Municipalities- xxx243ZA. Elections to the Municipalities.-xxx243ZB. Application to Union territories. - … for District Planning-A District Planning Committee constituted under the provisions of Section 121 of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 (Act No. 13 of 1994) shall be deemed to be the Committee constituted under Article 243ZD of the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Sep 21 1995

Chowgule and Co. Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Sep-21-1995

Subject : Customs

Reported in : (1995)(80)ELT680TriDel

under the direction of the Central Board of Excise & Customs which is part of the Ministry of Finance. This was not denied by the Revenue. Therefore, it appears that the Government intended to include Dredgers in … Bureau Veritas, N.K.K., D.N.V. This affidavit has been filed before us in 1994 and the Revenue has not contested the technical details of the vessel … issued by the Government, the Dredgers are to be classified under Item 73B at a machinery and not as an item falling within 76.1. We … in 1974) from Japan. (iii) After import, the vessel was registered under Section 34 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 (part V) & a certificate of Indian Registry No. 2194, dated 28-10-1986 was issued. This certificate is

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 06 2003

Srj Securities Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jan-06-2003

Subject : Direct Taxation

Details of purchase and sales of shares in 112 scrips i.e., ACC Ltd., Benzo Petro, Dewan Housing and Finance Ltd., GTC Ind. Ltd., Maral Overseas Ltd., Sanghi Polyester, Sterlite Communication, Uniplas Ltd., V.P. Polycon Ltd., Rathi Ispat … the business.10. Another argument that was raised during the course of hearing was that provisions of explanation to Section 73B are not applicable for the reason that the assessee is an investment company and, therefore, the losses that … facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the action of the authorities below in treating the business loss of Rs. 37,40,568

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial