Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: the information technology act 2000 section 21 · Page 1 of about 2,218 results (0.090 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Jan 16 2003

Subhash Gupta (individual) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jaipur

Decided on : Jan-16-2003

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2003)78TTJ(JP.)692

has filed every precise details as demanded from him and at no stage of assessment proceedings, he denied the information as demanded.The assessee also objected the remark of the AO that the assessee had fraudulently claimed the loss, … has completed the assessment at nil income vide order dt. 15th Feb., 2000, passed under Section 143(3) and has also initiated penalty proceedings under Section … 266 (Jp.Trib.); (h) Asstt. CIT v. Bansiwala Iron & Steel Re-Rolling Mills 21 Tax World 533 (Jp.Trib.); (j) ITO v. Manjit Singh Baldev Singh Commission … CIT(A), dt. 30th March, 2001, confirming the penalty, imposed by the AO under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act amounting to Rs. 14,45,240. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A)

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 27 2012

Commissioner of Customs and Central Exci Vs. M/S. Deloitte Tax Servaic ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-27-2012

Subject : Service Tax

on such services. He also relied upon the definition of the term "data" in Section 2 (O) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and contended that the activity of the assessee is in relation to operation of computer systems and therefore … then and therefore it did not fall under "Information Technology Services", that the CBEC in its circular dated 21-08- 2003 had clarified that the mere fact that a personal computer or a laptop has been used for

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 20 2023

Arun R.K. vs the State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2023

in the aforenoted paragraph.4. The Special Marriage Act has to be construedwith time, especially, in the light of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 6 of Information Technology Act recognise the use of electronic records in Government and its agencies. Section 6 … Sundaram. It was submitted that video-conferencing could not be allowed as the rights of an accused, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be subjected to a procedure involving “virtual reality”. Such an argument displays

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Jan 20 2023

Dhanya Martin, vs State of Kerala,

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2023

in the aforenoted paragraph.4. The Special Marriage Act has to be construedwith time, especially, in the light of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 6 of Information Technology Act recognise the use of electronic records in Government and its agencies. Section 6 … Sundaram. It was submitted that video-conferencing could not be allowed as the rights of an accused, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be subjected to a procedure involving “virtual reality”. Such an argument displays

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 20 2023

Mohanan.K., vs State of Kerala,

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2023

in the aforenoted paragraph.4. The Special Marriage Act has to be construedwith time, especially, in the light of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 6 of Information Technology Act recognise the use of electronic records in Government and its agencies. Section 6 … Sundaram. It was submitted that video-conferencing could not be allowed as the rights of an accused, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be subjected to a procedure involving “virtual reality”. Such an argument displays

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 20 2023

Pradeep John, vs the State of Kerala,

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2023

in the aforenoted paragraph.4. The Special Marriage Act has to be construedwith time, especially, in the light of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 6 of Information Technology Act recognise the use of electronic records in Government and its agencies. Section 6 … Sundaram. It was submitted that video-conferencing could not be allowed as the rights of an accused, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be subjected to a procedure involving “virtual reality”. Such an argument displays

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 20 2023

V.V.Soman vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jan-20-2023

in the aforenoted paragraph.4. The Special Marriage Act has to be construedwith time, especially, in the light of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Section 6 of Information Technology Act recognise the use of electronic records in Government and its agencies. Section 6 … Sundaram. It was submitted that video-conferencing could not be allowed as the rights of an accused, under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be subjected to a procedure involving “virtual reality”. Such an argument displays

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 24 2015

Shreya Singhal Vs. U.O.I.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-24-2015

Subject : Land Acquisition

over the internet is included within its reach. It will be useful to note that Section 2(v) of Information Technology Act, 2000 defines information as follows: "2. Definitions.-(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (v) "Information" includes data, … that could be viewed over the internet. The petitioners also contend that their rights under Articles 14 and 21 are breached inasmuch there is no intelligible differentia between those who use the internet and those who by

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 23 2024

Just Rights For Children Alliance Vs. S. Harish

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-23-2024

Subject : Right to Information

the petition and thereby quashed the chargesheet dated 19.09.2023 filed for the offences punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short, the “IT Act”) and Section 15(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 … been committed. It was pointed out that the failure to discharge this obligation by itself is punishable under Section 21 of the POCSO. She pointed out that the social media platforms claim to report such instances to the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 06 2013

Manoj Oswal Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Sr.P.i and Another

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Aug-06-2013

Subject : Right to Information

Crime Branch, Pune alleging offences punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. 4 The complaint alleges that one Prataprao Govindrao Pawar is Chairman of M/s Sakal Papers Private Limited. This … affirmed this position. The said contents and of website www.jeevraksha.org have been set out at Annexure B page 21 and what one finds is that they indicate, prima facie, as to how there were disputes between Parulekars

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial