Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 1968 Sorted by: old Court: allahabad Page 4 of about 10,933 results (0.075 seconds)

Cit Vs. Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [2005]142TAXMAN611(All)

..... the applicability of the later judgment to the facts under consideration on it.'12. it may be mentioned here that the legislature by the finance (no. 2) act, 1980 had introduced sections 80aa and 80ab into the act by the reason of the interpretation placed by the apex court upon section 80m in cloth traders (p.) ltd's case. section 80aa ..... constitutional validity of the retrospective operation of section 80aa but held that it was in retrospective operation, merely declaratory of the law as it always had been since 1-4-1968, when the provisions of chapter vi-a were introduced.13. the apex court in the case of h.h. sir rama varma v. cit : [1994]205itr433(sc) ..... was introduced with retrospective effect from 1-4-1968 and section 80ab was introduced with effect from 1-4-1981. in the case of distributors (baroda) (p.) ltd .....

The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2006)202CTR(All)343

..... applicability of the later judgment to the facts under consideration on it.'12. it may be mentioned here that the legislature by the finance (no.2) act, 1980 had introduced sections 80aa and 80ab into the act by the reason of the interpretation placed by the apex court upon section 80m in cloth traders (p.) ltd.'s case. section ..... validity of the retrospective operation of section 80aa but held that it was in retrospective operation, merely declaratory of the law as it always had been since april 1, 1968, when the provisions of chapter vi-a were introduced.13. the apex court in the case of h.h. sir kama varma (deed., by legal representatives) v. ..... 80aa was introduced with retrospective effect from 1stapril, 1968 and section 80ab was introduced with effect from is1 april, 1981. in the ease of distributors (baroda) p. .....

Mohd. Farooq Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [2006]280ITR484(All)

..... under the provisions of section 18(1)(c) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, read with explanation 4 to section 18(1)(c) of the wealth-tax act, 1957, despite the press note dated may 27, 1968, issued by the ministry of finance and circular no. 8-wt dated november 15, 1968, issued by the central board of direct taxes 2. the reference ..... relates to the assessment years 1979-80 and 1980-81 in the proceedings arising out of penalty imposed under section 18(1)(c) of the act.3. briefly stated, the ..... central board of direct taxes has reproduced the speech of the deputy prime minister made in the lok sabha on april 29, 1968, at the time of moving the finance bill, 1968, and had directed that his observations have to be carefully kept in view. the relevant paragraph of the speech has been reproduced in the circular, which reads as .....

Sri Gurbux Singh Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2005)198CTR(All)598; [2006]280ITR465(All)

..... from the object and reaches to the eyes of the person. taking into account the pious aim and object of the introduction of section 80u in the act by the finance act, 1968, we are of the opinion that total blindness under section 80u means an individual who is unable to perceive the light the total blindness does not mean ..... have considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. we find that section 80u was introduced in the statute book for the first time by the finance act, 1968. the original section 80u reads as follows.' 80-u - deduction in the case of blind persons- in computing the total income of an individual, being a resident ..... from 1-4-1971 the benefit has also been extended to such assessee who suffers from permanent physical disability ( other than blindness).8. the finance minister in his budget speech for the year 1968- 69 has stated as follows:' as a measure of relief to totally blind individuals proposed to provide for deduction of rs. two thousand .....

Gurbux Singh Vs. Cit

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [2005]147TAXMAN423(All)

..... from the object and reaches to the eyes of the person. taking into account the pious aim and object of the introduction of section 80u in the act by the finance act, 1968, we are of the opinion that total blindness under section 80u means an individual who is unable to perceive the light. the total blindness does not mean ..... have considered the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. we find that section 80u was introduced in the statute book for the first time by the finance act, 1968. the original section 80u reads as follows :'80u. deduction in the case of blind persons.in computing the total income of an individual being a resident, who ..... effect from 1-4-1971 the benefit has also been extended to such assessee who suffers from permanent physical disability (other than blindness).the finance minister in his budget speech for the year 1968-69 has stated as follows :'as a measure of relief to totally blind individuals i proposed to provide for deduction of rs. two .....

Gorakhpur Petro Oils Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad

Reported in : (2005)95TTJ(All.)489

..... , 2000. in the case of stellar investment ltd. as decided by the hon'ble delhi high court at p. 105 of 205 itr (in case of sophia finance ltd.) "section 68 of the act was not referred to and the observations in the said judgment cannot mean that ito cannot or should not go into the question whether the alleged shareholders actually ..... credited in the books of account as share capital is genuine will depend upon the facts of the case.in the case of stellar investment ltd. in civil appeal no. 1968/1996 order dt. 20th july, 2000, the hon'ble supreme court, confirmed the decision of hon'ble delhi high court in (1991) 192 itr 287 (del) (supra) because the ..... were not genuine, nevertheless, under no circumstances can the amount of share capital be regarded as undisclosed income of the assessee." the hon'ble supreme court in civil appeal no. 1968 of 1996 vide order dt. 20th july, 2000 has dismissed the appeal of the revenue against order of delhi high court (1991) 192 itr 287 (del) (supra) on the .....

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. D.P. Kanodia

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : [2008]296ITR616(All)

..... by the assessee it would not fall under the aforesaid clause. similar provision existed under section 40a(5)(a)(ii) and section 40(a)(v) inserted by the finance (no. 2) act, 1971, and finance act, 1968, with effect from april 1, 1969, respectively. the apex court in the case of cit v. mafatlal gangabhai and co. p. ltd. : [1996]219itr644(sc) ..... amount in question in the hands of the assessee by treating the same as a perquisite in terms of provisions of section 17(2)(iii)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961, also confirmed during first appeal.5. the tribunal, however, on an appeal by the assessee took the view that the receipt towards the reimbursement of medical ..... of medical expenses to an employee being the director of the company, is not 'perquisite' within the meaning of section 17(2)(iii)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961?2. the present reference relates to the assessment year 1990-91.briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:the assessee an individual .....

Society for the Promotion of Education Adventure Sport and Conservatio ...

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (2008)216CTR(All)167

..... the aforesaid principle has been followed and applied by the apex court in india in k.l. gupte v. municipal corporation of greater bombay : [1968]1scr274 ; reserve bank of india v. peerless general finance and investment co. ltd. (1987) 1 scc 5424; punjab land development and reclamataion corporation ltd. v. presiding officer : (1990)iillj70sc ; ..... short), therefore it did not seek separate registration under section 12a of the act, so as to claim exemption under section 11.3. section 10(22) being omitted by the finance act, 1998, the petitioner applied for registration under section 12a of the act, with retrospective effect, that is since the inception of the petitioner-society ..... decisions in such simple matters such as consideration of applications for registration even within the large six month period provided by section 12aa(2) of the act.20. we accordingly direct the respondents, subject to any order which may be passed under section 12aa(3), to treat the petitioner society as an .....

Mohd. Zafar Khan V. District Judge Hardoi

Court : Allahabad

..... down by full bench judgment of this court in the case of ganga saran v. civil judge, hapur, ghaziabad and others, 1991 (9) lcd 149 and sumtibai & others v. paras finance co. mankanwar w/o parasmal chordia (d) & ors. 2008 (1) arc 504 sri shafiq mirza, learned counsel for petitioner in rebuttal submits that in view of the authorities cited by ..... law prescribes a certain mode or specific mode of or for doing a thing or certain mode of exercising certain power of authority or right or for performing certain act then that act or thing has got to be done in that manner alone & not otherwise. other modes in respect thereof are necessarily and by necessary implication taken to have been ..... o parasmal chordia (d) & ors. 2008 (1) arc 504, hon'ble apex court held as under:-as observed by this court in state of orissa v. sudhansu sekhar misra, (air 1968 sc 647 vide para 13) :- a decision is only an authority for what it actually decides. what is of the essence in a decision is its ratio and not every .....

Emperor Vs. Chatur Singh and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1921)ILR43All92

..... in that case and an attempt was made to show that he could not have gone to the house as he was an outcaste. under section 132 of the evidence act the witnesses could have been compelled to answer the questions that were put to them, but it appears that they took no objection when the questions were put, and so ..... for the statements of his other co-accused.3. the learned sessions judge held that the accused persons could not claim the protection of section 132 of the indian evidence act because they had not protested when the question was put to them but answered it voluntarily. his judgment runs as follows: 'the question as to whether lallu singh had ..... when they were called as witnesses; that the questions were relevant to the trial which was then before the court, and that therefore under section 132 of the indian evidence act they were protected and could not be prosecuted for any offence other than that of perjury. the second point taken was that the trial of these five persons in one .....