Advanced Search Results

Dr. Prakash Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 32; ;Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention of Bootleggers, Drug-Offenders, (Forest-Offenders), Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers for Preventing their Dangerous Activities Prejudicial to the Maintenance of Public Order Act, 1982 - Sections 3(1); ;Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 67; ;Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 - Sections 4 and 6; ;Arms Act, 1959 - Sections 27

Reported in : AIR2002SC3533; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)275; 2002CriLJ4721; (2002)7SCC759; 2002(2)LC1501(SC)

respondent herein. The main ground of detentionare that the petitioner was indulging in offences under Section67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Sections 4 and 6of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act,1986 and under Section 27 of the Arms … detention.2. While the petitioner was a remand prisoner in CrimeNo. 1466/2001 of Vadapalani Police Station, he was detainedunder Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Preventive Detention ofBootleggers, Drug-Offenders, (Forest-Offenders), Goondas,Immoral Traffic Offenders and Slum-Grabbers for Preventingtheir Dangerous Activities

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Amritsar Beverages Ltd. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Sales Tax

Acts : Punjab General Sales Tax Act, 1948 - Sections 14 and 14(3); Information Technology Act, 2000; Evidence Act - Sections 45, 63, 73A, 85A and 85B; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 29, 167, 172, 192, 463 and 464; Negotiable Instruments Act - Sections 138; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 273; Constitution of India

Reported in : AIR2006SC2820; 2006(7)SCALE587; (2006)607SCC7; [2006]147STC657(SC); 2006(2)LC1111(SC); 2006(7)SCC607

Various new developments leading to various different kinds of crimes unforeseen by our legislature come to immediate focus. Information Technology Act, 2000 although was amended to include various kinds of cyber crimes and the punishments therefore, does not deal with … a hard disk. Seizure of documents indisputably was done in exercise of the powers of the authorities under Section 14 of the Act, Sub-section (3) whereof reads, thus:14. Production and Inspection of Books, Documents and Accounts:(1) ***(2)

The Commissioner of Income Tax and Vs. Mc Dowell and Company Ltd.

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 35D, 37(1), 37(3), 43A, 154, 234(2), 254(2) and 260A; Income Tax Rules - Rule 6D

Reported in : (2008)219CTR(Kar)544; [2009]310ITR215(KAR); [2009]310ITR215(Karn); [2009]177TAXMAN317(Kar); ILR2008(3)Kar3218; 2008(3)KCCRSN216; 2008(4)AIRKarR185(DB)

expenditure relating to share issue expenses has to be disallowed as capital in nature.' (The page number of first citation i.e. : [1997]225ITR798(SC) is incorrectly mentioned in the said paragraph as 225 ITR 728' and therefore the … 1. In this appeal, filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the IT Act' for short), the Revenue has challenged the correctness of the order dated 23.10.2002 passed … 92/Bang/2001 reversing its earlier common order dated 25.9.2000 passed in ITA Nos. 390/Bang/1997 and 422/Bang/1997 and thereby directing the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction

Orissa Consumers' Association and Anr. Vs. Orissa Electricity Regulato ...

Court : Orissa

Subject : Electricity

Acts : Electricity Act, 2003 - Sections 179, 181, 181(3) and 182; Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2004 - Regulation 2; General Clauses Act, 1897 - Sections 23, 23(2) and 23(5); Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 2(1), 4 and 8; Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission (Terms and Conditions for Determination of Tariff for Retail Sale of Electricity) Regulations, 2004 - Regulation 2

Reported in : AIR2005Ori11

Gazette (Extraordinary) on 10-6-2004 they came into force. He brought to our notice that Section 8 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 provides inter alia that where notification is published in the Official Gazette, then such requirement shall be deemed … may provide for the terms and conditions for determination of tariff under Section 61. He pointed out that sub-section (3) of Section 181 further provides that all Regulations made by the Commission shall be subject to the condition

Pootholi Damodaran Nair Vs. Babu

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Information Technology Act, 2000; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 3, 7, 8, 146(1), 153, 155(3) and 157; General Clauses Act - Sections 3(65); Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 13(1); Constitution of India - Articles 20(3) and 21; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 162

Reported in : 2005(2)KLT707

Courts have permitted the same very touch prior to the amendment of the Indian Evidence Act by the Information Technology Act, 2000, enlarging the definition of 'Evidence' in Section 3 as including electronic records. Really, the Courts can no longer

In Re: Sr. Abaya

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 2, 133, 145, 154, 154(3), 155, 156, 156(1), 156(3), 157, 157(1), 158, 159, 161, 173, 173(2), 173(4), 173(8), 190, 207, 207A, 207A(4), 208, 209, 251A(2), 251A(3), 310, 319, 319(1), 482, 539, 556 and 559B; Constitution of India - Article 227; Companies Act - Sections 3; Information Technology Act, 2000

Reported in : 2006CriLJ3843; 2006(2)KLT1001

Act. Section further clarifies that the expression 'electronic records' shall have the meaning assigned to it in the Information Technology Act, 2000. A strictly scientific and logical definition of the term 'evidence' is hardly possible by exclusion of facts. Judicial … word 'evidence' is not defined in the Criminal Procedure Code. But the Evidence Act defines the word evidence. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act reads as follows:Section 3 Interpretation Clause- In this Act the following words and

indira Priyadarshini Forum and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Kerala and ors.

Court : Kerala

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Constitution of India - Article 20(3); Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955; Information Technology Act, 2000; Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 - Sections 3

Reported in : 2001CriLJ2652

further speculation by the public. Videgraph of reconstruction of the incident was permissible under the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 according to the learned Public Prosecutor. The entire case diary as also the travel documents including the video … Central Government to constitute a special police force for investigating the offence or classes of offences notified under Section 3. Going by the organisational set-up, the special police force, C.B.I, operates through the following five Wings: (1) Special

Snapdeal Private Limited Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

regional, national and international brands and retailers. 4.2. Snapdeal is ‘intermediary’ as defined under Section 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IT Act’). An Crl.P. No.4676 of 2020 6 & Crl.P. No.4712 of 2020 … COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. ***** Crl.P. No.4676 of 2020 3 & Crl.P. No.4712 of 2020 THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS

Sri. Kunal Bahl Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

regional, national and international brands and retailers. 4.2. Snapdeal is ‘intermediary’ as defined under Section 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IT Act’). An Crl.P. No.4676 of 2020 6 & Crl.P. No.4712 of 2020 … COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MYSURU (ANNEXURE-A) AND ETC. ***** Crl.P. No.4676 of 2020 3 & Crl.P. No.4712 of 2020 THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS

Nirmaljit Singh Narula Vs. Indijobs at Hubpages.Com and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

of defendant No.2, it is an „intermediary‟within the definition of Section 2(1) (w) and Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Under Section 79 (3)(b) of the IT Act,2000, defendant No.2 is under an obligation to remove unlawful content