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

1. These 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 … Interest paid to land developers at 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 time of assessment as the revenue

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

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Right to Information

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 … 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 / … electronic record, section 13(2) does not contain such a deeming provision. 19. In any event section 13 of the IT Act is not relevant for deciding whether a party had knowledge of an order for the purpose of the

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

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

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 if it receives actual notice from the affected … 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

Copyright Act ("DMCA") whereby the liability of the defendants shall be exempted by operation of Section 79 of IT Act, 2000. g) The agreements or the assignments which are placed on record by the plaintiff are defective. The said … 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.)

v. Dy. CIT (1998) 61 TTJ (Cal) 576 : (1998) 66 ITD 39 (Cal), to contend that in such a case the question of physical … order of 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 … directed against the order of 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

Tata Sky Ltd Vs. Youtube Llc and Others

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property

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 … forms relevant to each category. 20. YouTube's defence is on the following lines: (a) Being an intermediary under the IT Act, is statutorily exempt under Section 79 from liability in respect of any third party video uploaded on the … 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.

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

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 … included as perquisite for rent-free accommodation and furniture and Rs. 13,200 towards conveyance at the value prescribed under the IT Act r/w IT Rules. He further reiterated that the amount in fact is in the nature of deductions from … 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

IT Appeal No. 112 which is 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 Section 143(3) on 23rd Nov., 1994 … CIT(A), Jabalpur which was disposed of by him on 7th Feb., 1995. Subsequently order under Section 263 of the IT Act was passed on 25th March, 1998 by the CIT, Jabalpur. Against this order, the Tribunal accepted the appeal

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

only one 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

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