Advanced Search Results

Gurcharan Singh Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : CustomsCriminal

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 2, 2(33), 2(41), 8, 11, 13, 50, 76, 77, 104, 111, 113, 123, 132, 135, 135(1), 135B, 136 and 136(1); Customs (Amendment) Act, 2003; Finance Act, 2003 - Sections 109; Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Sections 14, 14(1), 15 and 18; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 482; Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991; Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1993 - Rule 11

Reported in : 2008(1)ALD(Cri)968; 2008CriLJ2238; 2008(128)ECC5; 2008(154)LC5(SC); 2008(224)ELT497(SC); JT2008(4)SC383; 2008(4)SCALE403; 2008AIRSCW2280; 2008(2)AICLR821; 2008(3)Supreme28

entry of goods which was even otherwise covered. It is in that contingency that Section 109 of the Finance Act, 2003 provided:109. In Section 113 of the Customs Act, -(a) in Clauses (c), (e), (f), (g) and (h), the

Pawan Kumar and ors. Vs. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence

Court : Delhi

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 8, 11, 14, 27, 50(2), 111, 104, 113, 123, 132, 135, 135(1), 135(2), 136, 136(1) and 136(2); Finance Act, 2003; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 43B; Finance Act, 1987; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 107; Foreign Exchange Regulation Act - Sections 18 and 67

Reported in : 2007(94)DRJ566; 2007(218)ELT331(Del)

135 of the Customs Act. This submission was based on the amendment in the Act made by the Finance Act, 2003, which had brought in the activities of fraudulent claim of duty drawback within the four corners of punishing … that in view of amendment to the Act with effect from 1.4.2003 making such offence punishable by amending Section 113 of the Act, it was clear that such activities prior to 1.4.2003 were not intended to be punishable

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.S. Aggarwal

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 113 and 154; Finance Act of 2002

Reported in : [2009]308ITR69(Delhi); [2009]178TAXMAN311(Delhi)

Tribunal took the view that the proviso inserted to Section 113 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Finance Act of 2002, with effect from June 1, 2002, was prospective and that surcharge could only be levied in … regard to the levy of surcharge was debatable when the Assessing Officer passed his order on June 11, 2003, under Section 154 of the said Act. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the rectification proceedings were not in

Om Prakash Sharma Vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(JP.)246

charged at flat rate of 60 per cent. An amendment in this charging Section 113 was made through Finance Act, 2002. However, this amendment was made applicable w.e.f. 1st June, 2002. In the case of the assessee the … by the assessee pertaining to IT(SS)A No. 28/Jp/2003 against the order of the learned CIT(A) dt. 3rd Feb., 2003 for the block period 1st April, 1989 to 25th Feb., 2000 and the other by the Department pertaining

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ansal Properties and Ind. (Pvt.) Lt ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 113, 132, 154, 263 and 263(1); Finance Act, 1999; Finance Act, 2000; Finance Act, 2001

Reported in : [2009]315ITR225(Delhi); [2009]178TAXMAN201(Delhi)

did not have any retroactive effect. The proviso was inserted with effect from 1.6.2002 by virtue of the Finance Act, 1999 and there is nothing to indicate that it would operate from retroactively.10. The impugned order of the … levied with reference to the search conducted before 01.06.2006, the effective date of insertion of the proviso in Section 113 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?(2) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Dr. (Mrs.) Sharda Adhalkha

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)95TTJ(Asr.)643

of estimation was unavoidable. He referred to amendment to Sub-section (b) of Section 158BC as amended by the Finance Act, 2002, w.e.f. 1st July, 1995, as per which Section 144 and Section 145 were specifically made applicable to … income of Rs. 7,48,000. The AO completed block assessment on 28th Feb., 2003, determining the undisclosed income at Rs. 21,37,302 by making certain additions. These … different from the rate of tax on normal income disclosed in the regular returns. As per provisions of Section 113, as these stood in the statute prior to 1st June, 2002, it was not provided that in addition

Commr.of Income Tax-i,new Delhi Vs. Vatika Township P.Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

with amendments in Section 158BE, would be prospective i.e. it will take effect from 1st June, 2002. (f) Finance Act, 2003, again makes the position clear that surcharge in respect of block assessment of undisclosed income was made prospective. … assessees, the question of law which has fallen for consideration is as to whether the proviso appended to Section 113 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') which was inserted in that Section by

K.l. Swamy Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Direct Taxation

block period, absence of specific assessment year in the block assessment would render the levy suspect. XXXXXXXXXXXX44 The Finance Act, 2003, again makes the position clear that surcharge in respect of block assessment of undisclosed income was made prospective. … Section 12% 12% 12 12% 13% 2(3) or % 17% 2002 Section 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2(3) 2003 Section 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 2(3) 39.2. The rate at which tax, or for that matter surcharge is … for belatedly filing the return of income for the block period and also the levy of surcharge under Section 113 of the Income Tax Act.3. For the sake of convenience Civil Appeal No.3706 of 2012 arising out of

Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Uttamchand V. Sethiya

Court : Gujarat

Subject : Direct Taxation

the category of assessees and for some years, there is no surcharge at all.... . . . (f) Finance Act, 2003, again makes the position clear that surcharge in respect of block assessment of undisclosed income was made prospective. … to make the block assessment with the addition of levy of surcharge, in the absence of proviso to Section 113? In Suresh N. Gupta itself, it was acknowledged and admitted that the position prior to the amendment of

Ghanashyam Mishra And Sons Private Limited Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconst ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

a second proviso and consequent amendment in second proviso to section 43B of Income­tax Act, 1961 by the Finance Act, 2003 was held to be curative and retrospective. 28 AIR1997SC2523 p. 2538 : (1997) 5 SCC482 29 AIR1997SC1651 p. … of Income Tax v. Suresh N. Gupta, (2008) 4 SCC362paras 38 and 39 : AIR2008SC572 proviso inserted in section 113 of the Income­tax Act with effect from 1­6­2002 was held to be clarificatory and retrospective. Again in Commissioner