Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: finance act 2007 section 94 amendment of section 2 Sorted by: recent Page 1 of about 147,408 results (0.703 seconds)

Chain Roop Bhansali vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... that are not clear, the... petitioner's application was pending before the itsc. an amendment was made to the act by the finance act, 2007 whereby sub-section 4a was inserted in section 245d of the act. a distinction was drawn by the said provision between those applications filed before the itsc prior to 1st june ..... , 2007 and those that had been filed thereafter. under section 245ha(1)(iv) of the act if a final order under section 245d(4) was not passed by the itsc within the period prescribed under section ..... the above provision makes the legislative intent clear. the applications made under section 245c of the act before the itsc prior to 1st june 2007 and in respect of which no final order has been passed under section 245d(4) of the act by 31st march, 2008 shall abate on the specified date. this .....

Date of Decision : 5.8.2013 Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Punjab and Haryana

..... challenge has been made to the provisions of section 245d(2a) and section 245d(2d) and section 245ha of the income tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act .) as substituted by an amendment by the finance act, 2007 with effect from 1.6.2007 being ultra vires.2. the premises of the petitioner were searched under section 132 of the act on 17.1.1995. thereafter, he filed an ..... for which the application for settlement would be maintainable upto the stage of section 245d(1) and the settlement commission cannot reopen its concluded proceedings under section 154 of the act so as to levy interest under section 234b. it was noticed that amendment made by the finance act, 2007 with effect from 1.6.2007 was for this purpose. relevant portion of the judgment reads as under .....

The Commissioner of Income Tax-24 Vs. Knr Patel (Jv)

Court : Mumbai

..... of its decision proceeded on the basis that the revisional jurisdiction had been exercised by the cit only on the basis of the explanation inserted into section 80ia(13) by the finance act of 2007. that ex-facie is not a correct reading of the order passed by cit. the tribunal referred to the orders of its jaipur bench ..... the itat. the tribunal in paragraph 3 of its order, proceeded on the basis that the revisional jurisdiction under section 263 has been exercised by the cit in view of the explanation inserted into section 80ia by the finance act of 2007 with retrospective effect from 1st april, 2000. the tribunal observed that but for the explanation, there is no ..... v. dcit : (2005) 94 itd 411 (mum). however, the decision in patel engineering was distinguishable on facts; (iv) in any event, the retrospective amendment to section 80ia(4) by finance act of 2007 would lead to the conclusion that the order passed by the assessing officer was erroneous. the cit has adverted to the provisions of .....

M/s. Parle Agro Pvt Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Commercial Taxes Trivandrum

Court : Kerala

..... drink' containing fruit juice to an extent of more than 10% and that it had been assessed as a 'fruit juice based drink' till the finance act of 2007 amended section 6(1)(a) of the act by specifying that aerated branded soft drinks excluding soda would be liable to tax @ 20% at all points of sale within the state. the list ..... (6) beverages containing milk 2202.90.30" 8. it is pertinent to note that section 6(1)(a), as it stood prior to the amendment brought about by the finance act of 2006, did not contain any reference to aerated soft drinks. by the finance act of 2007, section 6(1)(a) was amended specifying aerated drinks including mineral water, packaged drinking water and ..... that the appellant's product which had the same hsn code was classified and taxed under the erstwhile entry 71(4). after the amendment brought about by the finance act of 2007 and the substitution of entry 71 by sro no.119 of 2008, the entry 71 was completely substituted. entry 71 as substituted by sro no.119 of 2008 .....

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mehta Charitable Prajnalay Trust

Court : Delhi

..... . there is no exhaustive definition of the words property held under trust in the act; however, sub-section (4) says that for the purposes of section 11, the words property held under trust includes a business undertaking so held. sub-section (4a) as it stands amended by the finance (no.2) act, 1991 w. e. f. 01.04.1992 is in the following terms: (4a ..... of the trust and the powers of the trustees.14. in respect of all the other assessment years namely 1993-94, 1994-95, 2001-02 and 2005-06 to 2007-08, the tribunal has followed the earlier order passed by it for the assessment year 1992-93 in ita no.3633/del/1996. there is no independent reasoning in ..... delhi at new delhi reserved on:6. h september, 2012 date of decision:20. h november, 2012 % + + + + + + + ita 309/2003 ita 417/2003 ita 18/2004 ita 722/2007 ita 770/2011 ita 1050/2011 ita 1051/2011 commissioner of income tax .....appellant through: mr. abhishek maratha, sr. standing counsel with ms. anshul sharma, advocate. mr. kamal sawhney, sr .....

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2007)9STJ217CESTAT(Mum.)bai

..... sides on the application for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax of rs. 5,35,94,363/- and penalty of rs. 100/- per day imposed under section 76 of chapter v of the finance act.the demand has been confirmed against the applicants herein, who are inter alia engaged in providing general insurance service, in respect of the policies issued prior to ..... and penalty and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal.2. since the amount involved exceeds rs. 5 crores the appeal is fixed for out of turn hearing on 12/04/2007 along with appeal no.st/295/2006.

The Bank Of Rajasthan Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... till the date on which interest is first due after the date of purchase.5. under the income tax act, 1961 (for short, the it act ), section 18, which was repealed by the finance act, 1988, dealt with tax leviable on the interest on securities. section 19 provided for the deduction of (i) expenses in realising the interest and (ii) the interest payable on ..... securities is uniformly assessed under the head profits and gains from business or profession , the decision of this court in the case of citi bank na3 will squarely 6 (2007) 289 itr6: (2007) 15 scc6117 (1960) 39 itr114:1960. scc online sc193civil appeal no.3291 3294 of 2009, etc. page 8 of 45 apply. it was submitted that in ..... the broken period interest paid to the seller as a cost but treated it as an item of expenditure under the profit and loss account. in 2007, the cbdt issued circular no.4 of 2007, observing that a taxpayer can have two portfolios. the first can be an investment portfolio civil appeal no.3291 3294 of 2009, etc. page .....

Renjit K.g.. Vs. Sheeba

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... undisputedly had notice of the pending 8 litigation. at the outset, it appears pertinent to reiterate the settled position that the doctrine of lis pendens as provided under section 52 of the act does not render all transfers pendente lite to be void ab initio, it merely renders rights arising from such transfers as subservient to the rights of the parties ..... a decree holder qua a third party to the suit and the right of a third party after being dispossessed has been laid down by this court in sriram housing finance & investment (india) ltd. v. omesh mishra memorial charitable trust, (2022) 15 scc176:2022. scc online sc794 wherein it was held as follows: 24. on conjoint reading of the ..... raghuthaman filed execution first appeals viz., efa nos.6 of 1998 and 7 of 1998, which came to be dismissed by the high court, by judgment dated 30.05.2007. seeking to review the said judgment, the respondents herein, who are the legal representatives of the said raghuthaman, filed r.p.nos.1107 and 934 of .....

M/s Shriram Investments Vs. The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iii Chennai

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... claim after the revised return was barred by time. this court considered the appellate power of the appellate tribunal under section 254 of the it act. paragraphs 10 and 11 of the said decision in the case of wipro finance ltd1 read thus:- 10. the learned asg appearing for the department had faintly argued that since the appellant in ..... return of income are mandatory in nature.8. coming to the decision of the tribunal, we find that the tribunal has not exercised its power under section 254 of the it act to consider the claim. instead, the tribunal directed the assessing officer to consider the appellant's claim. the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the ..... by the officials of the appellant. yet, the itat entertained the claim as permissible, even though for the first time before the itat, in appeal under section 254 of the 1961 act, by relying on the dictum of this court in national thermal power co. ltd. further, the itat has also expressly recorded the no objection given .....

Union Of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... period, then the time limit for completion or compliance of such action was extended to 30 june 2021. iii. finance act 2021 10. the finance act 2021 substituted the entire scheme of reassessment under sections 147 to 151 of the income tax act with effect from 1 april 2021. page 41 of 112 part a substantial changes were brought about by the new ..... writ petitions and quashed all the reassessment notices issued between 1 april 2021 and 30 june 2021 under the old regime on the ground that: (i) sections 147 to 151 stood substituted by finance act 2021 from 1 april 2021;26 (ii) in the absence of any saving clause, the revenue could initiate reassessment proceedings after 1 april 2021 only in ..... co. ltd., 1960 scc online sc105[7].; state of w b v. kesoram industries ltd., (2004) 10 scc201[106]. 81 mahim patram (p) ltd. v. union of india, (2007) 3 scc668[25]. 82 (1975) 2 scc736[29]. page 64 of 112 part d not admissible in the interpretation of a charging or taxing provision of a taxing statute.37 .....