Constitution Of India Article 368 Power Of Parliament To Amend The Constitution And Procedure Therefor - Judgment Search Results
Home > Cases Phrase: constitution of india article 368 power of parliament to amend the constitution and procedure therefor Court: mumbai Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 300 results (2.919 seconds)Patel Engineering Co Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Bo ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-09-1981
Reported in : (1981)25CTR(Bom)151; [1982]135ITR49(Bom)
partnership it is made clear that the dividends interest on securities and capital gains will be required to be excluded 20 gains of business or profession it is true that the article the is not to be found in the said section
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAjaykumar S/O Wiralal Gupta Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-06-1981
Reported in : 1982(2)BomCR176
for the offence under sections 392 and 397 of the indian penal code 7 the learned sessions judge however accepted the contains two pieces of gold which are collectively numbered as article 7 seizure and panchanama in that respect is at ex and after examining the accused persons under section 313 criminal procedure code the learned sessions judge came to the conclusion that that the next discovery regarding the revolver was recorded he therefore tried to suggest that the timings recorded on the documents
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTAdditional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indian United Mills Ltd.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-24-1981
Reported in : (1982)27CTR(Bom)207; [1983]141ITR399(Bom); [1982]8TAXMAN182(Bom)
allowed in terms of s 10 2 v of the indian i t act 1922 5 in addition to this claim v gannon dunkerley co ltd 1979 119itr595 bom these questions therefore will have to be answered in the affirmative and in
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-iii Vs. Public Utilities Inves ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-27-1981
Reported in : (1982)26CTR(Bom)135; [1983]143ITR257(Bom)
case for certain years under s 66 1 of the indian i t act 1922 and for other years under s the contention went to the root of the question of jurisdiction and ultimately decided in favour of the revenue we are to the extent that it covers the second question and therefore relates to the jurisdiction of the high court to consider
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTSavalram Dinaji Waghire Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-12-1981
Reported in : 1982(1)BomCR446; (1982)84BOMLR116; 1982MhLJ299
objections to the provisions of the same and the planning authority is bound to consider the said objections before the development inclined to dismiss the petition the rule earlier issued is therefore discharged in the circumstances of the case there shall be
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Desmet (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-31-1981
Reported in : (1981)25CTR(Bom)157; [1982]138ITR382(Bom); [1982]8TAXMAN87(Bom)
extraction plants there was another company called oil corporation of india private ltd hereinafter referred to as the oil company carrying the purchase consideration of the assessee company s business and therefore a capital outlay 5 the assessee company carried the matter
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTState of Maharashtra and anr. Vs. Mohanlal S/O Purshottamdas Patel and ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-20-1981
Reported in : 1982(2)BomCR148
under section 11 or under section 12 2 of the indian land acquisition act the applicants therefore submit that 20th september of compensation the claimants sought for a reference to the civil court and their claim in the reference petition was at 12 2 of the indian land acquisition act the applicants therefore submit that 20th september 1969 is the date of knowledge
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTDwarkadevi (Smt.) Wd/O Jagdishprasad Choudhary Vs. Narsingdas S/O Ramp ...
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-14-1981
Reported in : 1987(2)BomCR680
by the learned additional district magistrate who exercised the appellate power under clause 21 of the rent control order the successor on a question of fact also the reviewing authority could therefore interfere if it found that the finding of the appellate
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTP. Vs. P. and R.
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-06-1981
Reported in : AIR1982Bom498
reports is one chitnis an operative of the detection serive india pvt ltd the detective agency employed by the petitioner his of such a danger this is the position after the amendment of the hindu marriage act in the year 1978 as it should be pleaded order 8 rule 2 of the civil p c provides inter alia that the defendant must raise of 1980 by reg kanade jj dated 10th march 1981 therefore one has to determine whether this incident is such as
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTCommissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-ii Vs. Shantilal J. Mehta
Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-30-1981
Reported in : (1981)24CTR(Bom)127; [1981]132ITR453(Bom)
which were to be found in s 30 of the indian i t act 1922 and which also occurred in s aac that the condition necessary for the exercise of the power under s 139 1 read with s 139 8 did was denying his liability to be assesse under this act therefore even assuming that in view of the three decisions relied
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT