Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act 1961 chapter xxiii miscellaneous Court: guwahati Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 6 results (0.068 seconds)

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

Court : Guwahati

..... or not, what is imperative to note is that in ito v. seth brothers : [1969]74itr836(sc) , the apex court, while considering the action taken under section 132 of the income-tax act, 1961, held as under (page 843) :'if the action of the officer issuing the authorization or of the designated officer is challenged, the officer concerned must satisfy the court about the ..... . the patna high court in a recent decision in takshila educational society v. director of income-tax (investigation) : [2005]272itr274(patna) , while examining the provisions of section 132 of the income-tax act and the scope of judicial scrutiny, held as under (headnote) :'the provisions of section 132 of the income-tax act, 1961, are directed against persons, who are believed, on good grounds to have illegally evaded payment .....

L. Biakchhunga Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court : Guwahati

..... of the applicability of the code and no analogy can be drawn for resolving the issue in hand. similarly reference to section 10(26) of the income-tax act, 1961, is also of no relevance vis-a-vis the question posed. the embargo contained in article 371g vis-a-vis the state of mizoram is also ..... where parliament lacks jurisdiction. it also excludes territories for which the legislator did not intent to legislate.territorial extent: meaning of 'extent'the extent of an act is the geographical area throughout which it is law.application of an enactmentunless the contrary intention appears and subject to any privilege, immunity or disability arising ..... application of the laws already in force in the union territory of mizoram with the adaptations, amendments, modifications and exceptions mentioned therein. by the constitution (amendment) act (67 of 1988), the lakher district and the pawi district were replaced by the mara district and the lai district respectively. with the above alteration, the .....

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

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : (2005)196CTR(Gau)318,[2005]275ITR502(Gauhati)

..... or not, what is imperative to note is that in ito v. seth brothers : [1969]74itr836(sc) , the apex court, while considering the action taken under section 132 of the income-tax act, 1961, held as under (page 843) :'if the action of the officer issuing the authorization or of the designated officer is challenged, the officer concerned must satisfy the court about the ..... . the patna high court in a recent decision in takshila educational society v. director of income-tax (investigation) : [2005]272itr274(patna) , while examining the provisions of section 132 of the income-tax act and the scope of judicial scrutiny, held as under (headnote) :'the provisions of section 132 of the income-tax act, 1961, are directed against persons, who are believed, on good grounds to have illegally evaded payment .....

Neepco Tribal Employees' Welfare Association, Vs. Union of India (UOi ...

Court : Guwahati

..... ]68itr272(sc) , was whether the exclusion of government servants from the purview of exemption granted by section 4(3)(xxi) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and later by section 10(26) of the income-tax act, 1961, was violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. the respondent there belonged to the mikir scheduled tribe and was a permanent inhabitant ..... or in the union territories of manipur and tripura, provided that such member is not in the service of government. 28. this clause was re-enacted in the income-tax act, 1961, as section 10(26). the state of nagaland was added to the areas specified in section 10(26) by the state of nagaland (adaptation of laws of ..... not entitled to the benefit of exemption. the apex court held that the exemption under section 4(3)(xxi) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and section 10(26) of the income-tax act, 1961, was intended to be provided to the members of certain scheduled tribes and, therefore, some of the members of that tribe could not be .....

M.S. Associates Vs. Uoi

Court : Guwahati

..... to note is that in ito v. seth bros. : [1969]74itr836(sc) , the apex court, while considering the action taken under section 132 of the income tax act, 1961, held as under :'. . . if the action of the officer issuing the authorization or of the designated officer is challenged, the officer concerned must satisfy the court ..... information as to the true and correct state of the law. subsequently, the supreme court in cit v. a. raman & co. : [1968]67itr11(sc) , defined the expression 'information', occurring in section 147(b) of the income tax act, 1961, as instruction or knowledge derived from an external source concerning facts or particulars or as to the ..... 137 of 2000 :7. (a) by this writ petition, the petitioner shri ajoy kumar subba, challenged the search and seizure conducted by the income-tax department under section 132 of the act of 1961 at the residence of the petitioner at tinsukia, the case of the petitioner in this writ petition being, briefly stated, thus : the petitioner .....

Neepco Tribal Employees' Welfare Association, Vs. Union of India (UOi) ...

Court : Guwahati

Reported in : (2007)211CTR(Gau)133,[2007]290ITR481(Gauhati)

..... ]68itr272(sc) , was whether the exclusion of government servants from the purview of exemption granted by section 4(3)(xxi) of the indian income-tax act, 1922 and later by section 10(26) of the income-tax act, 1961, was violative of article 14 of the constitution of india. the respondent there belonged to the mikir scheduled tribe and was a permanent inhabitant ..... or in the union territories of manipur and tripura, provided that such member is not in the service of government. 28. this clause was re-enacted in the income-tax act, 1961, as section 10(26). the state of nagaland was added to the areas specified in section 10(26) by the state of nagaland (adaptation of laws of ..... not entitled to the benefit of exemption. the apex court held that the exemption under section 4(3)(xxi) of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and section 10(26) of the income-tax act, 1961, was intended to be provided to the members of certain scheduled tribes and, therefore, some of the members of that tribe could not be .....