Advanced Search Results

M Moser Design Associates India Pvt Ltd vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

a competent Court.It is submitted that Proton Mail has not been blocked in India under Section 69A of IT Act, 2000 and is operating in India.” (Emphasis added)The communication is from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government … These actions of the certain unknown accusedpersons clearly disclose commission of several cognizable offences inter alia under Sections 75, 79, 356 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ("BNS") and Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology

Sri. Chandrashekar B vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

ON BAIL IN CRIME NO.69/2025 OF CYBER CRIME POLICE STATION FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 67 AND 66(C) OF THE IT ACT, 2000 AND U/S 351(3), 352, 75(3), 79 R/W SECTION 3(5) OF THE BNS 2023, PENDING ON THE FILE OF

Arun T a vs the State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

been dropped against the petitioner. However, offences under Sections 75 and 78 of BNS and Section 66E of the IT Act have been retained.5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that The allegations are inherently improbable and suffer … and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”) and Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short "IT Act") against the petitioner (Accused No.1) and others.3. It is alleged that the complainant becameacquainted

Arjun Malhotra Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)84TTJ(Delhi)269

preferential shares was done on 25th Aug., 1997, except the book entries in their own record. According to Section 75 of the Companies Act, 1956 the assessee is required to file a return of allotment of shares stating … gains earned on transfer of shares and eligibility of deductions in terms of provisions of Section 54F of the IT Act, 1961 against the purchase of new residential house.3. Brief facts borne out from the record in nutshell are

Shamraj Moorjani Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Hyderabad

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2005)93TTJ(Hyd.)927

been filed by the assessees directed against separate but identical orders of the CIT(A)-II, Hyderabad, dt. 27th Oct., 2000, IT(SS)A No. 31/Hyd/2000 is filed by a partnership firm consisting of three partners. The appellants in all the … had not paid the taxes as per the admitted income, by invoking the provisions of Section 249(4)(a) of the IT Act, 1961. The facts of the case are as follows.3. Shri Shamraj Moorjani, Shri Devraj Moorjani and Shri Vishnukumar … returns of income on 11th Oct., 1999, declaring net income of Rs. 75,16,763. The tax payable on this income returned amounted to Rs. 43,12,708, i.e.,

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 … banks, the high courts had rightly treated the Crl Rev.No.443/2009 & Crl.M.A.No.3071/2010 75 Companies Act as a general statute and the Recovery of Debts Act, … 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

Pramodh K vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

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

Fathima a.S. vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act,2012 ('POCSO Act') and under Section 67B(d) of the Information Technology Act,2000 (I.T.Act). Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is also alleged against

Agrawal Farm Equipments Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Jabalpur

Subject : Direct Taxation

Reported in : (2004)85TTJJab723

defiance to guidelines mentioned in Board's Instruction No. 1967, dt. 7th June, 1999 and 1984 dt. 9th June, 2000 (common for all 3 years). 2. That the learned CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining disallowances as under … CIT(A)-II, Jabalpur, dt. 21st Jan., 2002 for the asst. yrs. 1995-96, 1996-97 and 1997-98 under Section 143(3)/147 of the IT Act 1961.2. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are more or less the same and arise out … as gross profit shown by assessee is Rs. 81,726 and not Rs. 75,232. The learned Authorised Representative of the assessee drew my attention to page

M.S. Associates, Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Guwahati

Subject : Direct Taxation

Acts : Indian Partnership Act, 1931; Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 120, 132, 132(1), 147, 158BB, 158BC, 158BD and 246A; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 74 and 75; Constitution of India (15th Amendment) Act, 1963; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) - Sections 2(17); Parliament Act; Income Tax Act, 1922 - Sections 22(4), 24, 34(1), 37(1), 131(1) and 142(1); Information Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 2(1); Constitution of India (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 - Sections 26; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 154; Legislative Assembly Rules - Rule 235; Constitution of India (42nd Amendment) Act; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1), 31, 32, 74(2), 105, 148, 149, 150, 151(2), 194, 194(3), 226 and 226(2)

of electronic record as defined in Clause (t) of Sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), to afford the authorised officer the necessary facility to inspect such books of account or … report was under consideration of the Assembly. This document could not be treated as a public document under Section 75 of the Evidence Act read with Section 2(17)(g) and (h) of the Code of Civil Procedure. This view