Advanced Search Results

Pabhojan Tea Estate Vs. The Union of India, Represented by the Secreta ...

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Excise

account of delayed payment made by the writ petitioner of (1) additional duty of excise payable under the Finance Act 2003, (2) cess payable under the Tea Act and (3) Education cess payable under the Finance Act on the … duty payable as a surcharge on” Tea and Tea waste” at the rate of “Rs. one per Kg”. Section 157 (1) of the Finance Act provided that there shall be levied and collected for the purpose of … those rules, as the case may be.” THE FOURTH SCHEDULE [See sections 128(1) and 157(1)]Item No.Description of goodsRate of duty(1)(2)(3)1Tea and tea wasteRupee one per

Itc Ltd Vs. Cce, Kolkata Iv

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Service Tax

the ‘assessment’ as prevailed under the 1962 Act and the amended definition under the Act, assessment w.e.f. 8.4.2011, Finance Act, 2011, Section 17 and Section 27 as amended by the Finance Act, 2011. It was urged by learned … considered or decided in the said final assessment order.10. On July 18, 2003, the appellant filed a refund claim for an amount of Rs.28,73,120/­ in … remedies can be availed without filing appeals. It was further urged that no appeal can be filed under section 128 of the Customs Act against the bill of entry. As the scheme of assessment under Section 17 of

Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (2006)102TTJ(Mum.)53

etc. and other concerning the payment with regard to provident fund, superannuation fund or gratuity fund, etc. The Finance Act, 2003, omitted second proviso and the 1st proviso is made applicable with regard to all the payments including the … to the satisfaction of the Court. The expression "sufficient cause or reason" as provided in Sub-section (5) of Section 253 of the IT Act is used in identical position in the Limitation Act and the CPC. Such

Abhay Pratap Singh Sengar Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Lucknow

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2007)108ITD8Luck

r/w 6(6) of the Act. The learned CIT(A), after considering the amendment brought in the Act by the Finance Act, 2003 in Section 6(6), observed that the person will be 'not ordinarily resident' only when he is non-resident in … decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Keshvan v. State of Bombay AIR 1951 SC 128 wherein it has been held that a cardinal principle of construction of statutes is that every statute is

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 … v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty [(1981) 2 SCC460:1981. SCC (Tax) 119 : (1981) 128 ITR294, in the following manner: (SCC p. 465, para10) :27. : “10.

Kirloskar Electric Co Ltd Vs. The State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

Counsel for Mr. T. Suryanarayana, Advocate) And:1. The State of Karnataka Represented herein by the Principal Secretary - Finance Department, Government of Karnataka Vidhana Soudha, Bengaluru-560 001. …Petitioner 2. Date of Judgment 10-01-2018 W.P.Nos.58917-58928/2016 and Connected Matters … passed by the 2nd Respondent under Section 39(1) read with Section 36(1) of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, for the tax periods April 2009 to March 2010 are ex facie illegal and unsustainable & etc., W.P.Nos.26349-26360/2017: … under Sections 10(5) and 20 of the KVAT Act read with Rule 128 of the KVAT Rules for the tax periods April 2013 to March

Lalit Kumar Jain Vs. Union Of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

with financial creditors, from contracts with operational creditors for sup- plying goods and services. Financial creditors generally lend finance on a term loan or for working capital that enables the corporate debtor to either set up and/or … extinguished.14. It is argued that the liability of a guarantor is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor (Section 128 of Indian Contract Act, 1872). Further, it is settled law that upon conclusion of insolvency proceedings against a

Suhag Traders (P) Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Delhi)116

normal aids to construction, it cannot be said that because the second proviso has been omitted by the Finance Act, 2003 Section 43B is also now covered by the first proviso. In interpreting statutory provisions, the Court also considers the

Bangalore Turf Club Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Direct Taxation

Minister made a speech on the Floor of Parliament making it explicitly clear and indicating thereunder that by Finance Act , 1986 Section115BB has been inserted to provide gross winnings from lotteries, crossword puzzles, races including horse races … (5) Declare that Stake Money paid by the petitioner cannot be construed as winnings from games as per Section 194B of the Act. (6) Declare that the correct provision applicable in the present case is the Board

The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.K. Khosla

Court : Chennai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 17(1), 17(2), 17(3), 143(1), 143(3), 147 and 148; ;Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 - Section 7(1); ;Income Tax Rules - Rule 3; ;Finance Act, 1999 - Section 17(2); ;Finance Act, 2001; ;Finance Act, 2002 - Section 271; ;Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 - Section 2; ;Constitution of India - Article 20(1)

Finance Act, 2002, only stated that the amended provision would come into force with effect from April 1, 2003. The statute nowhere stated that the said amendment was either clarificatory or declaratory. On the contrary, the statute … is answered accordingly.Further, this Court also considered the new provision of Section 17(3)(ii), which was inserted by the Finance Act, 2002 and held that the amendment is only prospective in nature and not retrospective and in paragraph 22, … nil.15. In the case of CIT v. B.C. Srinivasa Setty : (1981) 128 ITR 294 (SC) this Court held that the charging section and the