Advanced Search Results

Bharatkumar Sakhsaria Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2002)82ITD512(Mum.)

tax on returned income. The assessee also explained that the appeal was to be filed on 26th March, 2000, which was actually filed on 24th March, 2000, without paying the remaining amount because of lack of liquidity … These authorities support to some extent the view that we have taken as to the interpretation of the first proviso of Section 30(1) of the Indian IT Act." 7. The learned counsel further referred to the case

Vipul Dye Chem Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2003)86ITD851(Mum.)

retrospective.6. The learned counsel also made reference to Section 115JB of the Act which was inserted by Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 1st April, 2001, wherein as per Clause (iv) of the Explanation, the amount of profits eligible for … provisions." 2. The assessee is a company carrying on business of manufacturing and trading dyes and dye-products. The first ground of appeal taken up by the assessee is regarding the non-granting of deduction under Section 80-1 of

Dev Kumar JaIn Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)82TTJ(Delhi)703

142(2) which, empowers the ITO to make inquiries which he considers proper for the purpose of obtaining full information in respect of the income of any persons.' 29. The order of the Indore Bench of the Tribunal … gave notice to the assessee vide No. VOI/ND/ Co-01/2001-01/100 dt. 17th Nov., 2000. On 22nd Nov., 2000, an adjournment request was received on behalf of … the same, the matter was referred to the District Valuation Officer, IT Department under Section 55A of the Act for determining the fair market value of the plot on the date of the sale i.e. 6th June,

income Tax Officer Vs. Godrej Soaps Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2008)114TTJ(Mum.)950

arise directly from and entitled to various businesses carried on by the assessee. In the absence of specific information regarding receipt of rental income which may be assessed under house property, the following income was assessed under … making any adjustments. Subsequently assessee filed the revised return on 30th March, 2000 declaring same income under Section 115JA and loss at Rs. 34,04,65,648, which … Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A) in allowing exemption under Section 10(33) of the IT Act, 1961, even though after reducing the interest and expenses attributable to the dividend income, the net dividend was

Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan Vs. U.O.i. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

505(2) | |2. |The Representation of People Act, |Sections 8, 123 | | |1951 |(3A), 125 | |3. |Information Technology Act, 2000 &|Sections 66A, 69, | | |Information Technology |69A | | |(Intermediaries guidelines) Rules,|Rule 3(2)(b), Rule | | |2011 … heading the political party in exercise of power vested inter-alia under Article 324 of the Constitution read with Sections 29A(5), 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Section 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Syncome Formulations (i) Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2007)106ITD193(Mum.)

new Section 115JB from the asst. yr. 2001-02 onwards. This new provision has been introduced by the Finance Act, 2000. This section also retained the deduction available under Section 80HHC under Expln. (iv) provided under Section 115JB(1). In … eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC computed under Clauses (a), (b) or (c) of Sub-section (3) thereof. Hence, first it has to be determined whether the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 80HHC. If he is

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Dharamendra Textile Processors and o ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Excise

Acts : Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 3A, 3A(3), 3A(4), 9, 11A, 11A(2), 11AB, 11AC and 15H; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rules 96ZO, 96ZQ, 96ZQ(5), 9620(3), 173Q, 173G(1) and 173G(4); Finance Act, 1996; Finance Act, 2000; Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 115O(2), 132, 132(4), 139, 139(1), 142(1), 142(2A), 143, 143(1), 143(2), 148, 153(1), 194B, 271, 271(1), 271B, 271C, 271F, 272(1), 272A and 276C; Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 - Sections 12B, 15A, 15B, 15C, 15D, 15E, 15F, 15G, 15H, 15I, 15J and 24; Forgien Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 - Sections 10, 10(1), 23, 23(1) and 37(1); Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 - Regulation 25(7); Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997; Hot

Reported in : 2008(133)ECC247; 2008(159)LC247(SC); 2008(231)ELT3(SC); [2008]306ITR277(SC); JT2008(11)SC255; 2008(13)SCALE233; (2009)11VatReporter63; (2008)18VST180(SC); 2008AIRSCW8038

for reasons to be recorded in writing, the delay in giving prior information under Clause (b), if he is satisfied that such delay in giving … under Sub-section (2) of Section 11A, relates to notices issued prior to the date on which the Finance Act, 2000 receives the assent of the President;(2) any amount paid to the credit of the Central Government prior to … any continuous period of not less than seven days and wishes to claim abatement under Sub-section (3) of Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the abatement will be allowed by an order passed by the Commissioner

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court : Kerala

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 - Sections 42(1), 42(1A), 42(2), 42(3A), 42(5), 42(7), 58B and 58D; Banking Regulation Act, 1949 - Sections 24(1), 24(2A), 24(7) and 24(8); ;Income-tax Act, 1961 - Sections 37(1)

Reported in : (2003)183CTR(Ker)1; [2004]265ITR177(Ker)

the CIT(A) allowed their claim holding that the payments are not in the nature of the penalty. The first appellate authority also relied on the decision of the Supreme Court in Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Co. v. CIT … penal interest is paid to the RBI for non-maintenance of cash reserve as stipulated by the Banking Regulation Act which cannot be considered as payment for infraction of law. In appeals by the assessees, the CIT(A) allowed … to the RBI and on which the claim for deduction is made.5. Section 37 of the IT Act, 1961, provides that any expenditure (not being

Asstt. Cit Vs. Ajanta Pharma Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

under Section 80HHC is a different thing. After introduction of Sub-section (1B) to Section 80HHC by the Finance Act, 2000 with effect from 1-4-2001 the entire profit derived from the export of goods or merchandise is not available

Balaji Computers and ors. Vs. the State of Karnataka Represented by It ...

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Sales Tax

Acts : Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 - Sections 3(1), 3A, 3A(1), 3A(2), 5(3), 6B, 6B(2), 6C, 8A, 10, 10(1), 10(2), 12A, 21, 22A, 22A(1), 22A(2), 38(3), 42B, 42B(1), 42B(2) and 68; Karnataka General Clauses Act, 1899 - Sections 20 and 21; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 194C; Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam Act, 1964 - Sections 2 and 17; Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944; Central Excise Rules, 1944 - Rule 8(1); Constitution of India - Articles 19(1), 29(2), 226 and 227; Karnataka Sales Tax Rules; Karnataka Sales Tax (Amendment) Act

Reported in : ILR2006KAR38; [2006]147STC269(Kar)

to be an Association formed for the benefit and to protect the cause of persons connected with the Information Technology Industry and as such it has filed the writ petition along with the appellants 1 to 3 being … to as 'the Act'), by means of Notification No. FD 48 CSL 2000 (2) dated 18'' July 2000; No. FD 97 CSL 2001 (7) No. … having not been gazetted, it is not valid in law and the said clarification cannot be traced to Section 3A(2) of the Act. In support of this submission, he drew our attention the decision of this Court in