Advanced Search Results

Kiran Corporation Vs. the Asstt. C.i.T.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2006)102TTJ(Ahd.)375

the Income-tax Act and contended that Explanation to Section 36(1)(vii) applied in this case was introduced, by the Finance Act, 2001 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1989. The aforesaid Explanation, was not applicable when the return for the relevant assessment … in J.K. Synthetic's case we respectfully follow the same in view of the constitutional directive contained under Article 141. 25. For the aforesaid reasons, we hold that the adjustment made by the A.O. Under Section 143(1)(a) disallowing

Kiran Corpn. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2006)98ITD119(Ahd.)

under Section 36(1)(vii) would be treated as complied with.However, Explanation has been inserted below Section 36(1)(vii) by the Finance Act, 2001 with effect from 1-4-1989 which provides that any provision for bad and doubtful debt would not qualify as … Synthetics Ltd.'s case (supra) we respectfully follow the same in view of the constitutional directive contained under Article 141. 25. For the aforesaid reasons, we hold that the adjustment made by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(1)(a)

Asstt. Cit, Salary Circle 11 Vs. Ian Peter Morris

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (2006)7SOT279(Chennai)

authorised representative further pointed out that section 17(3)(iii) which covers this type of payments was inserted by the Finance Act, 2001, with effect from 1-4-2002. Therefore, in any case, such payments cannot be taxed.In the rejoinder, the learned Departmental … made under section 143(i) does not exclude the power of the assessing officer to reopen the assessment under section 141 if the ingredients of section 147 are satisfied. It is open to the assessing officer to invoke the

Pandurang Camotim Sancoalcar Vs. Suresh Prabhakar Prabhu and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : CompanyCriminal

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 2(26), 303 and 303(2); Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973

Reported in : 2001BomCR(Cri)857; [2003]113CompCas600(Bom); 2001CriLJ2945; 2000(4)MhLj429; [2003]48SCL437(Bom)

particularly of a judgment delivered by Justice Lodha in the case of Dushyant D. Anjaria v. Wall Street Finance Ltd. : (2001)1BOMLR387 ; [2001] All. M. R. 62. The resignation becomes effective as soon as it is … be set aside because in none of the complaints there were allegations sufficient to fulfil the requirements of Section 141 of the said Act. However, according to all the advocates for the complainant arguing before me the aforesaid

Everest Advertising Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 to 141; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 319 and 482

Reported in : [2005]128CompCas787(Delhi); 124(2005)DLT353

of the Act. It can be seen that the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Ashok Leyland Finance Ltd. v. R.S. Aggarwal and Ors. reported as 2003 (10) SCALE 1000 made the following observations:''It is settled … allegation is sufficient to summon respondent Nos.2 and 3, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short the `Act') which provides for the responsibility of an offence committed

Rohit Chunubhai Mehta Vs. Gujarat State Fertilizer Co. Ltd.

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138, 141 and 141(2); ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 114 and 420; ;Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 - Sections 18A, 291, 292 and 293; ;Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 244 and 258

Reported in : 2004CriLJ2298; (2004)3GLR1952

justified.4.5. It was vehemently argued by Mr. Thakkar that, there being a managing director (accused No.1), a whole-time finance director (accused No.12) and a finance manager (accused No.13) and the signing and delivery of the cheques having … OF BIHAR [(2000) 4 SCC 168], S.N.PALANITKAR v. STATE OF BIHAR [AIR 2001 SC 2960], 1990 Suppl. SCC 607, AJAY MITRA v. STATE OF M.P. … in charge of the day-to-day business affairs of the company, could not be implicated under the provisions of section 141 of the NI Act merely because of being and as the directors of the accused company. A distinction

Aggarwal and Modi Enterprises (Cinema Project) Private Limited and anr ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Civil

Acts : New Delhi Municipal Corporation Act - Sections 140, 141 and 141(2); Constitution of India - Article 14; Rent Act, 1995; Mulla's Transfer of Property Act; Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 - Sections 4

Reported in : 2003VIAD(Delhi)1; 106(2003)DLT113

of authority. 'Similar position of law has also been laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. vs. Reserve Bank of India, : 1991CriLJ1391 , Premium Granites vs. State of T. … writ petition seeks the setting aside of the order dated 13th November, 2001, passed by respondent New Delhi Municipal Council (hereinafter referred to as `N. … August, 2000 clearly indicates that the petitioner was picked out for such hostile treatment against the mandate of Section 141(2) of the NDMC Act. The plea that Section 141(2) applies only in case of new projects indicates a

Suhas Bhand Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Company

Acts : Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 255 to 258, 303(1) and 303(2); Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 74, 76, 77 and 79; Contract Act - Sections 70; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482

Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR3774

said judgment make this aspect clear. In paragraph 20, the case of Dushyant D. Anjira v. Wall Street Finance Ltd. and Anr. AIR 2001 Bom 655 has been considered. It has been held in that case that … Act, 1956 in a criminal proceeding initiated against such Director of such Company under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Act). 2. The Petitioners in each of these Petitions are one

Bedi Sons Steels and Wires Vs. B.G. Brothers

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Subject : CriminalBanking

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138, 141 and 142; Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 11; General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 3(42)

Reported in : [2002]112CompCas426(P& H)

quashing the proceedings as against accused No. 1.'6. Further reference was made to P. Muthuraman v. Shree Padmavathi Finance (Regd.), I (1995) BC 304=1996(1) Company Law Journal 247, wherein it was laid down as under :'It is … that company.'The same decision was reiterated in R. Rajagopal v. S.S. Venkat, 2001 (3) RCR (Criminal) 347.9. It is apparent that in Sri Sivasakthi Industries … In this case, the first accused is not a firm. It is only a proprietary concern. As such Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which enables prosecution against the company as well as other person who at

Renewable Energy Systems Ltd. and ors. Vs. State and anr.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : BankingCriminal

Acts : Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 141

Reported in : 2000(2)ALD(Cri)596; 2001(2)ALD(Cri)701; [2002]111CompCas786(AP)

Matched in: Citation 2000(2)ALD(Cri)596; 2001(2)ALD(Cri)701; [2002]111CompCas786(AP)