Advanced Search Results

Schenectady Beck India Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)92TTJ(Mum.)872

AO is thus prejudicial to the interest of Revenue." 4. Shri Khare, the learned counsel for the assessee first drew our attention to the highlights of the agreement which are as follows: Clause (1) Agreement to lease-Lessee … two appeals are directed against the orders of the CIT, City-IV, Mumbai, under Section 263 of the IT Act and the main common ground raised reads as under: "The learned CIT made a grievous error by assumption … Pune, amounting to Rs. 96,57,346 for the asst. yr. 1995-96 and Rs. 39,42,230 for the asst. yr. 1996-97 was allowed by the AO, at the

Pushpanjali Tie Up Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Renudevi Choudhary and Others

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Right to Information

that respondent No.3 had knowledge of the order on 29.10.2013 itself. 16. Mr.Setalvad relied upon section 13(2)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) to contend that respondent No.3 must be deemed to have had knowledge of the ad-interim order … the order of the learned single Judge, dismissing the notice of motion filed by the appellant under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, challenging the transfer / confiscation of the shares which are

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

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

act 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 … on filing of process fee and registered AD cover within one week, returnable on 04.05.2012. I.A. No.6038/2012 (u/O XXXIX, R.1 and 2 CPC) 1. Issue notice for the date fixed. 2. The Plaintiff claims that he is

Super Cassetes Industries Ltd. Vs. Myspace Inc. and Another

Court : Delhi

Subject : Civil

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Order 39 Rules 1, 2, 4 - Section 20 (c); Information Technology Act, 2000 - Section 79; Digital Millennium Copyright Act; Copyright Act, 1957 - Section 51(a)(i); Engraving Copyright Act, 1734; Telegraphs Act 1863; Specific Relief Act, 1963

acts of the defendants are those of intermediatory and are protected under the provisions of Section 79 of Information Technology Act, 2000. The said provision will act as safe harbor provisions of US Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") whereby the … 1. By this order, I shall dispose of the following applications: a) IA No.15781/2008 under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the CPC). b) IA

Ellenbarrie Industrial Gases Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2002)83ITD111(Kol.)

of lease rent thereunder was very much a part of the disclosed operation of the assessee and all the information regarding thereto were/must have been within the knowledge of the AO at the time of making the regular … v. Dy. CIT (1998) 61 TTJ (Cal) 576 : (1998) 66 ITD 39 (Cal), to contend that in such a case the question of physical … the CIT(A) confirming mostly the additions made in the block assessment completed under Sections 143(3)/158BC(c) of the IT Act, 1961.2. The search and seizure operations took place in the premises of the assessee-company on 22nd Jan., 1997 … CIT(A) confirming mostly the additions made in the block assessment completed under Sections 143(3)/158BC(c) of the IT Act, 1961.2. The search and seizure operations took

Tata Sky Ltd Vs. Youtube Llc and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

Tata Sky is bound to protect. Please be advised that this is an offence under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 read with Section 107 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code. 9. .. Therefore, you are required to … allowed and Defendant No. 2 is deleted from the array of parties. I A No. 353/2016 (under Order XXXIX Rule 4 CPC) 4. In view of the above order in I. A. No. 48 of 2016, this

Garrick D'Silva Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2006)105TTJ(Delhi)445

stock option by the assessee in the previous year relevant to asst. yr. 1998-99. In response, the following information was furnished by the assessee in regard to grant, exercise and sale of stock options:S.No Date Grant/ Basis … shares, was liable to tax as income from 'capital gains'. This sub-Clause (iii)(a) was deleted by the Finance Act, 2000 w.e.f. 1st April, 2001 and a new proviso to sub-Clause (iii) of Clause 2 of Section 17 was … value was less than 10 per cent of the salary. (e) Rs. 39,79,815 being the amount of net gain on sale of exercised stock options

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Vindhya Telelinks Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2007)107TTJJab149

Section 148 the appellant filed the returns. The appellant also received notices under Section 143(2) calling for further information on certain points in connection with the returns. Thereupon the appellant filed writ petitions challenging the notices. The … stated to be pending.5. The notice under Section 148 dt. 23rd Oct., 2000 was issued for the reasons that: (1) Original assessment was completed under … entire assessment was bad in law. 4. The appellant is relying on decision of R.L. Narang which is actually against the appellant. The appellant is not appreciating that valid notice under Section 148 is a condition precedent

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Borosil Glass Works Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(Mum.)361

ground raised in this appeal It relates to interpretation of the provisions of Section 115J(2) of the IT Act, 1961. The facts of the case in brief are as follows : 3. For the asst. yr. 1988-89, … follows : 3. For the asst. yr. 1988-89, the assessee was originally assessed to an income of Rs. 39,39,228, after allowing deduction for the brought forward unabsorbed investment allowance of Rs. 54,76,236. It was subsequently found that

K.R.Ravi Rathinam Vs. 1. the Director General of Police

Court : Chennai

Subject : Land Acquisition

11 have committed offences under Sections 66 B, 66 E, 72, 72 A r/w. 76 and 77 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Sections 109, 379, 403, 420, 468, 470, 471 along with 120 (b) of IPC. The intellectual property … the Respondents 7, 8, 10 and 11.9. The Respondents 7, 8, 10 and 11 have committed offences under Sections 66 B, 66 E, 72, 72 A r/w. 76 and 77 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and