Advanced Search Results

Essar Steel Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)97TTJ(Ahd.)985

not affect its taxability in any way. The company could not claim any relief under Section 70 or Section 71 since its business had not started and there could not be any computation of business income or loss … the nature of the receipt under the general law that determines its nature for the purpose of the IT Act but the receipt would have to be considered under the provisions of the IT Act from the commercial

Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee Vs. Uoi and anr.

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

the matter was to be examined in the light of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (‗JJ Act, 2000‘ hereafter) and not by the Magistrate under Section 17A of the IT Act, 1956. It … is a special Act dealing with a specific Crl Rev.No.443/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.3071/2010 71 subject, namely with conditions of service, enumerated in the Schedule, of workmen … and 5 of the Crl Rev.No.443/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.3071/2010 2 Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereafter referred to as the 'IT Act of 1956').3. As per the complaint, it appears that A & B, hailing from extremely poor families of

income Tax Officer Vs. Bir Engg. Works [Alongwith Misc.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Amritsar

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)94ITD164(Asr.)

appeals are concerned, appeals to Tribunal should not be filed if the tax effect was less than Rs. 2000. For appeals arising from income-tax, such monetary limit was fixed at Rs. 5,000. The main objective was to … 1. In exercise of the powers vested under Section 255(3) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter, referred as the Act), the President of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short ITAT) has constituted … computation of relief under Section 80M involving question of interpretation of Section 71(2) is a debatable question, and, therefore, it was not mistake apparent from

Abhishek Mishra vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

504, 506, 509 OF IPC AND SEC.3(2)(v) OF SC/ST (POA) ACT 1989 AND SEC.66-E OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 (ANNEXURE-D) AND ETC.,THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 25.06.2025, COMING ON FOR … SRI B.N.JAGADEESHA, ADDL.SPP FOR R-1; SRI M.B.RAVI KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 ) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OFCR.P.C., PRAYING TO 1. QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN SPL.C.NO.1029/2024 PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE COURT

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. Fertilizer Traders [Alongwith

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(All.)473

CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the validity of the order dt. 4th Oct., 2000 that had been passed earlier by the Dy. CIT, Central Circle, Gorakhpur under Section 154 r/w Section 158BC, … The relevant portion of the reply appears in the paper book-II p. 71 and is reproduced below : Reg.: M/s Fertiliser Traders and Saraf Trading … are directed against different orders of the CIT(A)-I, Kanpur dt. 14th Aug., 2002 passed under Section 158BC/154 of the IT Act, 1961.3. In both the cases of the assessees, undisclosed income was computed and thereafter it was bifurcated in

XXXXXX vs Sri. Balamanjunathaswamiji

Court : Karnataka

OFFENCES P/U/S 4, 6, 11(iv) AND 12 OF POCSO ACT, 2012, SECTION 66(E) AND 67(A) OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2000, SECTION 376, 354(A)(1)(i), 354(A)(1)(ii), 417, 342, 506 R/W SECTION 34 OF IPC SECTION 3 OF RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS (PREVENTION OF … taken up together and considered by this common order.2. Heard in Criminal Petition Nos. 8786 of 2024 and 71 of2025 Sri Sandesh J.Chouta, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri B.N.Jagadesha, learned State Public Prosecutor for

Swami Ramdev & Anr. Vs.facebook, Inc. & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

Rules are relevant. The same are extracted below: CS (OS) 27/2019 Page 63 of 76 The Information Technology Act, 2000 Section 2(j) ―computer network means the interconnection of one or more computers through- (i) the use of satellite, microwave, … and of 15 September 2016, McFadden, C‑484/14, EU:C:2016:689, paragraph 96). … CS (OS) 27/2019 Page 56 of 76 71. It is for the referring court to ascertain whether, also having regard to the recent changes made to

Shri Rama Multi Tech Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Ahmedabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)92TTJ(Ahd.)568

the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the accounts of assessee have been audited-under Section 44AB of the IT Act, 1961, and the auditors have certified that proper books of account have been maintained giving quantitative details of … other by the Revenue are directed against the order of CIT(A), dt. 5th March, 2004, for asst. yr. 2000-01. Since the assessee is the same and some of the issues involved in these appeals are interlinked, these … the case of CIT v. Alembic Glass Industries Ltd., (1976) 103 ITR 715 (Guj) for allowing the interest on borrowed capital as revenue expenses. The

Picker India Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

filed by the Revenue and both are against the order of the CIT(A)-XXIX, New Delhi dt. 14th July, 2000. There are six grounds in the appeal of the assessee. Grounds 3 to 6 of the assessee's appeal … resident assessee as held in the cases of Kusum Products Ltd. (1993) 71 Taxman 611 (Cal) and Slocum Investment (P) Ltd. us. Dy. CIT (2006) … with certain guidelines. Further, the CIT(A) is directing the AO to apply the provisions of Section 92 of the IT Act and issuing certain directions in this regard. Finally, other two grounds Nos. 1 and 2 are: 1. That

Smt Shaila Chebbi Govind Vs. The State of Karnataka By

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Right to Information

66 (B) , 71 , 73 and 74 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IT Act, 2000’, for brevity) and Sections 465, 468, 469, 471, 474, 476 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal