7 2 - Judgment Search Results

Rampuria Industries and Investments Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of ...

Court: Kolkata

ORDER SHEET WP No.1156 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAMPURIA INDUSTRIES & INVESTMENTS LIMITED Versus DEPUTY

Siemens Information System Ltd. Vs. the Assistant Commissioner of Inco ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (2008)214CTR(Bom)16

F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent, heard forthwith.2. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax 7(2), Mumbai sought to reassess the petitioner in respect of its income for the assessment year 2001-02 under Section

Sadhna Nitro Chem Ltd. Vs. A.B. Koli, Assistant Commissioner of Income ...

Court: Mumbai

re-open the assessment for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000; and (b) two separate re-assessment orders passed on 7th March, 2006 by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act for Assessment … M.S. Sanklecha, J. 1. These two Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenge:— (a) two separate notices dated 25th January, 2006 issued under Section 148

N. Mohammed Ali Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward-VII(2), Chennai

Court: Chennai

business expediency compelled him to make such payments. But, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rejected the appeal. 7. Therefore, the assessee filed a further appeal in I.T.A.No.272 of 2005. 8. In the meantime, a notice under … V. Ramasubramanian, J. 1. Both the appeals, filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were admitted on the following substantial questions of law: ” "(1) Whether

Kamakshi Devi Avaru Vs. The Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(2), Bangalore

Court: Karnataka

(Prayer: These appeals are filed under Section 27-A of Wealth-Tax Act, 1957 praying to allow the appeals and set aside the order of the Income Tax

Hi-q Electronics Pvt. Ltd. 679, 10th Main, 4th Block, Koramangala, Ban ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2000(4)CTC342

have to decide whether the petitioner is entitled for refund of the amount paid towards Earnest Money Deposit. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that after inspection of the properties, the petitioner has … ORDER1. The respondents 1 and 2 exercising powers under section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 brought in the properties question for

The D.C.i.T. (Osd), Range 7(2) Vs. Saraf Chemicals Ltd.

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2006)102ITD356(Mum.)

1. These three departmental appeals, involving common issues, are disposed of by this common order as under: 2. The first ground of appeal pertains to deletion by the ld. CIT(A) of the addition of Rs. 62,858/- … covered in assessee's favour by the Bombay High Court decision in the case of Sudarshan Chemicals 245 ITR 769. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is confirmed.4. The ground No. 3 pertains to