Advanced Search Results

Home Solution Retail India Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service TaxProperty

Acts : Finance Act, 1994 - Sections 64 to 96; Finance Act, 2007; Transfer of Property Act, 1882 - Sections 3

Reported in : 2009BusLR378(Del); (2009)223CTR(Del)191; 2009(164)LC297(Delhi); 2009(237)ELT209(Del); [2009]17STJ143(Delhi); 2009[14]STR433; [2009]20STT129; (2009)22VST508(Delhi)

circular a completely erroneous interpretation is placed on Section 65 (90a) and Section 65 (105) (zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1994 as amended by the Finance Act, 2007. It is further alleged that because of this incorrect interpretation, … validity and vires of notification No. 24/2007 dated 22/05/2007 and circular No. 98/1/2008-ST dated 04/01/2008 issued by the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, … bad in law. With reference to the decision in the case of Union Of India v. Intercontinental : 2008(226)ELT16(SC) , the learned Counsel submitted that a circular or notification can never rewrite or amend the provisions of

Vodafone International Holdings B.V., a Company Incorporated Under the ...

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 1(2), 2, 2(17), 2(23A), 2(31), 2(37), 2(47), 4, 4(1), 4(2), 5(2), 9, 9(1), 23(1), 23(3), 24, 26, 64, 64(2), 173, 191, 192(1A), 194, 194C(1), 195, 195(1), 195(2), 195(3), 197, 199, 200, 201, 203A, 221, 221(1), 201(1A), 245S, 246A and 271C; Foreign Contribution Regulation Act; Indian Official Secrets Act; Constitution Act; Information Technology Act; Indian Passport Act; Indian Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 18, 19 and 42; Finance Act, 2008; Indian Telegraph Act, 1885; MRTP Act - Sections 33; Finance Act, 2002 - Sections 201; Companies Act; Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2008 - Sections 191 and 201; Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2002; Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 2003; Income Tax Rules - Rules 30 and 31A, 41E; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1

Reported in : 2009(4)BomCR258; (2008)220CTR(Bom)649; [2009]311ITR46(Bom)

Matched in: Citation 2009(4)BomCR258; (2008)220CTR(Bom)649; [2009]311ITR46(Bom)

R (on the Application of Prudential Plc and Another) Vs. Special Commi ...

Court : UK Supreme Court

Subject : Right to Information

of TMA have now been replaced by provisions contained in section 113 of, and Schedule 36 to, the Finance Act 2008 ("the 2008 Act"). While there are differences between the regime in TMA and that in the 2008 Act, … coherently characterised in a judgment by Lord Brougham LC in Greenough v Gaskell (1833) 1 My and K 98, 102-103. (Litigation privilege seems to have developed rather later “ see per Lord Carswell in Three Rivers (No

Maharaj Krishan Datta and Others Vs. Icici Bank Ltd.

Court : Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission UT Chandigarh

Subject : MRTP

and Ors. v. Reserve Bank of India and Ors., III (2008) CPJ 98 (NC)=2008 (3) CPC 232 (NC) and Rohit Bajaj and Ors.v. ICICI Bank … It, thereafter, referred to its own judgment in Complaint Case No. 1441 of 2008-Birbhan Goyal v. ICICI Home Finance Co. Ltd. and Ors., decided on 6.7.2009, vide which the OP Bank had been directed to overhaul the … no avail. Subsequently, the matter was taken up with the Banking Ombudsman but nothing was done. Alleging the act of OP in charging more interest rate than the agreed one from complainants as deficiency in service, on … sent to the parties free of charge. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2(1)(g), 2(1)(r) and 14(1)(d) - Cases Referred: 1. Birbhan Goyal v. ICICI

Test Claimants in the Franked Investment Income Group Litigation Vs. C ...

Court : UK Supreme Court

Subject : Land Acquisition

such cases: para 260. It was not open to the Revenue to rely on section 320 of the Finance Act 2004 ("Section 320 FA 2004") or section 107 of the Finance Act 2007 ("Section 107 FA 2007") to … date on which it was enacted (19 March 1997) had made claims for repayment of unduly levied tax." 98. The issue of specific targeting was raised at first instance, but in view of the conclusions which he

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jindal Exports Ltd. and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 2, 2(1), 2(43), 16(3), 24(2), 90, 90A, 91, 115J, 115JA, 115JA(1), 115JAA, 115JAA(1), 115JAA(2), 115JAA(4), 115JAA(5), 119, 139, 140A, 140A(1), 142, 143, 143(1), 144, 147, 148, 154, 155, 158BC, 207, 208, 209, 209(1), 210, 215(2), 234A, 234B, 234B(1), 234B(2), 234C, 234C(1), 245D(4), 245D(6), 250, 254, 260, 262, 263 and 264; Finance Act, 2006; Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987; Finance Act, 1997; Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996

Reported in : (2009)221CTR(Del)8; [2009]314ITR137(Delhi); [2009]179TAXMAN391(Delhi)

Section 234C(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') by virtue of the Finance Act, 2006, w.e.f. 1st April, 2007. According to the learned Counsel for the appellant/Revenue, after the said amendments, there … 2007, 907 of 2007, 914 of 2007, 969 of 2007, 989 of 2007, 1350 of 2007, 546 of 2008, 701 of 2008, and 893 of 2008. Question B has been framed in IT Appeal Nos. 1474 of … 407 of 2007, 907 of 2007, 914 of 2007, 969 of 2007, 989 of 2007, 1350 of 2007, 546 of 2008, 701 of 2008, and

M/s. Bharti Airtel Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Service Tax

amount of Rs.2,04,39,093/- under provisions of Rule 14 of the Credit Rules read with Section 73 of the Finance Act,1994. In respect of towers and parts thereof, prefabricated building, printers and office chairs, the Commissioner observed that the … 2005 three further show cause cum demand notices were issued issued covering the period October 2005 to March 2008 dated 23.4.2007, 8.2.2008 and 23.10.2008 making an aggregate demand of Rs.15,40,63,898/- as also interest and equivalent penalty was … of “State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., (2012)49 VST 98 (AP))” and observed that telecommunication towers are held to be immovable property.

National Mineral Development Corporation Limited, rep. by its Regional ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

not a literal meaning. In this regard, he placed reliance on Reserve Bank of India vs. Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Limited and others [(1987) 1 SCC 424] with regard to construction of statute after ascertaining … Ecology and Environment SecretariatNOTIFICATION No.FEE 248 FDP 2006, Bangalore, Dated: 16th August, 2008 In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 98-A … India, praying to declare that the respondents are not entitled to demand and collect forest development tax under Section 98-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 on the value of mineral sold by the petitioners in respect of

National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd Vs. State of Karnataka by ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Education

not a literal meaning. In this regard, he placed reliance on Reserve Bank of India vs. Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Limited and others [(1987) 1 SCC424 with regard to construction of statute after ascertaining its … writ petitions, petitioners have assailed Gazette Notification bearing No.248/FD2006dated 16/08/2008 issued by the State Government under -:132. :- Section 98-A of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for the sake of brevity). (b)

Mahindra Electric Mobility Limited and Anr. Vs.cci and Anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

have been taken over by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (hereafter “NCLAT”) due to provisions of the Finance Act, 2017. Though by amendments, the petitioners have impugned provisions of the Finance Act nevertheless, they do not press … sector) and the Airports Economic Regulatory W.P.(C) 11467/2018 & connected matters Page 66 of 152 Authority of India Act, 2008 (regulating the airports segment) have followed different evolutionary paths. These laws have also been amended, to cater to … 70 of 152 (c)The Electricity sector: provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 98. In the Electricity Sector, at the primary level, a dual regulatory regime … Act, 2002 (hereafter “the Act”). The specific challenge is to provisions of Sections 22(3), 27(b), 53A, 53B, 53C, 53D, 53E, 53F and 61 (“the impugned