Advanced Search Results

Bharatiya Janata Party Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2002)80ITD89(Delhi)

making activity into a profit earning one as of now.46. During the course of the present hearing, no information has been furnished to us by either side as to whether similar publishing activity is being carried on … learned standing counsel also relied on a Departmental Circular dt. 19th Oct., 2000, according to which provisions of Section 44AB r/w Section 271B were held … far, although they may loosely serve in the ordinary run of cases." 25. Sri. Ahuja placed reliance on the decision of jurisdictional High Court rendered … as a National Party with the Election Commission of India. A notice under Section 142(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the "Act") and a letter bearing No. 363 dt. 30th Nov., 1995 were issued on

Skullcandy Inc vs.shri Shyam Telecom & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

CPC primarily on the ground that intermediaries are exempt from liabilities under Section 79 of the Information and Technology Act, 2000. However, this Court finds that in the present plaint there is an allegation that the applicant- defendant who … been coined in the year 3.2003. The said mark is also registered in India in class 9 and 25. The CS(COMM) 979/2016 Page 1 of 20 on the sellers/merchants ‘SKULLCANDY’ mark is also represented in a unique

Ms. Rakshha vs the State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

quash the FIR in Crime No.109/2024 dated: 14.05.2024 for the offences punishable Under Section 66 and 66(C) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against he Petitioner/Accused which is pending on the … of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860);(b) the word ―fraudulentlyǁ shall have the meaningassigned to it in section 25 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). 66C. Punishment for identity theft.-Whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly make use

K. Ramajayam @ Appu Vs. The Inspector of Police, T-4, Maduravoyal Poli ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

- Section 3, Section 25, Section 114, Section 45, Section 45A, section 76, Section 62, Section 65B - Information Technology Act, 2000- Section 2, Section 2(t), Section 2, Section 79A - Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920 - burglary and murder €“

Mr. Rahul Pandya vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

NO.1145 OF 2020 REJECTING THE ‘B’ REPORT, TAKING COGNIZANCE OF THE OFFENCES UNDER SECTIONS 66, 66(C), 72(A) OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2000 AND SECTION 420 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE AND DIRECTING THE COMPLAINANT TO LEAD EVIDENCE ON 20-07-2024 AT DOCUMENT

M/S. Abraham Memorial Educational Trust and Others Vs. C. Suresh Babu

Court : Chennai

Subject : Education

of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Section 85 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 149 of the Electricity Act, 2003, Section 47 of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974, … any other relevant Acts through the Chairman or Secretary of the trust or (c) A company established under Section 25 of Companies Act, 1956. (d) Central or State Government / UT Administration or by a Society or a

Christian Louboutin Sas vs.nakul Bajaj & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

e-commerce platform be termed as intermediary?.11. Does e-commerce website automatically come under the definition of intermediary?. As per the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter, ‘IT Act’) an `intermediary’ is defined as under: company which every runs an “Section 2(w) “intermediary”, with … Article 9(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94.” Insofar as liability of the service provider is concerned, the Court held 25. that the following is required to be established: Accordingly, in order to establish whether the “114. liability of

Dr. Rini Johar and Anr. Vs. State of M.P. andors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

made, FIR No.24/2012 under Section 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for brevity, ‘the Act’) was registered against the petitioners by Cyber Police Headquarters, Bhopal, M.P. The respondent no.2,

Deputy Director of Income Tax Vs. Shanti Devi Progressive Education So ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Income Tax

Acts : Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 10(22), 253, 255(4), 260(A), 12A

above, was framed to be answered by this Court vide order dated 11.05.2000.11. It would be appropriate to first reproduce the relevant provision under Section 10(22) of the IT Act as it stood for the relevant Assessment … treated as income of the respondent/assessee.ITAT PROCEEDINGS8. The respondent/assessee thereafter filed an appeal before the ITAT under Section 253 of the IT Act. This gave rise to divergence of views between the Judicial Member and the Accounting

Pramodh K vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

IN CRIME NO.30/2025 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 67, 66(C) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 AND SECTION 351(2), 351(3), 352, 75(1)(iv), 79 OF BNS 2023 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE 45TH ACJM … 351(2), 351(3), 352, 75(1)(iv), 79 OF BNS, 2023.IN CRL.P. NO. 12944/2025: BETWEEN:1. OBANNA T S/O THAMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT: NO.83 KUMATHI VILLAGE, KOODLAGI TALUK VIJAYANAGAR - 583 126. -6-2. GANGADHAR K M S/O MUNINANJAPPA