Court : Supreme Court of India
..... entries in the form of share capital from kolkata based shell companies. on the basis of the said report, the notices under section 148 of 44 the income tax act for the year 2011-12 an 2012-13 were issued to mr. satyendar kumar jain. the information regarding accommodation entries was also received by the initiating officer ..... on the accommodation entries received during the check period. (iv) the ids filed u/s 183 of the finance act, 2013 was declared void u/s 193 of the said act by the income tax authorities. hence, the said act of the appellants filing the ids cannot be construed as basis for levelling charges under section 3 of pmla. reliance ..... be disclosed by the appellants under the ids declarations belonged to the appellant- satyendar jain, and the said ids declarations were rejected by the income tax authorities under section 193 of the finance act, 2016 on the ground of misrepresentation and suppression of facts. the said order was upheld by the high court and the supreme court. ( .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... been paid to the defendant nos.1 to 4.14. it is also contended that when the plaintiff had admitted in the cross-examination regarding filing of the income tax returns, no documents have been placed before the trial court to substantiate the passing of consideration 15 to the defendant nos.1 to 4. the trial court ..... with regard to the limitation aspect was erroneous in the circumstances of the case?.3. whether the exercise of law of discretion under section 20 of the specific relief act in ordering specific performance was unwarranted in the circumstance of the case?. . 2018. learned counsel appearing for the appellant in his argument, apart from the grounds ..... of the contract, by adducing cogent evidence. learned counsel referring this judgment would vehemently contend that both the courts failed to consider section 16(c) of the specific relief act, 1963.23. the counsel also relied upon the judgment in ram awadh (dead) by lrs. and others vs. achhaibar dubey and another reported in (2000) 2 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... of 2018 1 ma4862024 order1by a judgment dated 15 february 20241, this court declared the electoral bond scheme and the provisions of the finance act 2017 which amended the provisions of the representation of people act 1951 and the income tax act 1961, unconstitutional on the ground that the non-disclosure of information regarding the funding of political parties is violative of the right to information ..... of citizens under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution. the amendments which were introduced by the finance act 2017 to the provisions of the companies .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... of 2018 1 ma4862024 order1by a judgment dated 15 february 20241, this court declared the electoral bond scheme and the provisions of the finance act 2017 which amended the provisions of the representation of people act 1951 and the income tax act 1961, unconstitutional on the ground that the non-disclosure of information regarding the funding of political parties is violative of the right to information ..... of citizens under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution. the amendments which were introduced by the finance act 2017 to the provisions of the companies .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... of 2018 1 ma4862024 order1by a judgment dated 15 february 20241, this court declared the electoral bond scheme and the provisions of the finance act 2017 which amended the provisions of the representation of people act 1951 and the income tax act 1961, unconstitutional on the ground that the non-disclosure of information regarding the funding of political parties is violative of the right to information ..... of citizens under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution. the amendments which were introduced by the finance act 2017 to the provisions of the companies .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... been reduced. the appellants had claimed receipts on that account to the tune of 25,00,000/-. further, thiru. kalayana sundram, income tax officer, appeared as rw2. he stated that the deceased did not pay income tax of 1,48,598/- for the year 2010-11. there is also evidence on record to show that the deceased received 22 ..... appeal is regarding the quantum of compensation to which the appellants are entitled to.5. the tribunal, after considering the evidence led by the parties, opined that the income of the deceased was 50,000/- per month. applying a cut of 1/4th for his personal expenses and adding 10% for future prospects, assessed total compensation ..... death, the land was lying barren and was not being cultivated. page 7 of 915. assessment of compensation cannot be done with mathematical precision. the motor vehicles act, 1988 also provides for assessment of just and fair compensation. in our opinion, considering the material placed on record by the appellants, as has been referred to above .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... 1998 which was annexed with the affidavit filed on behalf of the custodian and was heavily relied upon by the special court. no witness from the income tax department was examined in evidence before the special court in miscellaneous applications for recovery.34. while initiating recoveries, the custodian relied upon the provisions of ..... in the proceeding before the special court. learned counsel urged that the since the custodian failed to bring the letter of the income tax department on record, either by summoning the income tax officials or by producing any other admissible evidence, the special court committed a grave error on placing implicit reliance on such communication. ..... section 102 of the evidence act, perhaps, the onus could be shifted on to the appellants to rebut the same.37. the entire case of the custodian regarding subsisting debts of the appellant towards respondent nos. 6, 7 and 8 was based on a communication received from the income tax department. the appropriate witness .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... be deviated from reconsidering previous decisions is permissible when it is necessary in public interest .38. the decision in keshav mills (supra) interpreted the provisions of the income tax act, 1922 and in the circumstances of that case, the court did not find any compelling reasons to reconsider previous decisions on a similar point of law. the court ..... primary consequence. this court has overruled decisions 21 see sambhu nath sarkar v. state of w.b., (1973) 1 scc856 lt. col. khajoor singh v. union of india, (1961) 2 scr828 union of india v. raghubir singh, (1989) 2 scc754 pradeep kumar biswas v. indian institute of chemical biology, (2002) 5 scc111 supreme court advocates-on-record ..... candidatures, send to each elector a notice informing him of the date, time and place fixed for polling. part vi of the conduct of elections rules, 1961 which contains rule 69 and part vii thereof deal with the procedure to be followed at an election by assembly members. rule 85 of the conduct of elections .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... to be saddled on the insurance company to pay compensation to the claimants.17. insofar as quantum of compensation, the tribunal has assessed income of the deceased at rs.3,000/- per month. as per second schedule appended to the mv act, maximum income of deceased is fixed at rs.40,000/- per annum. hence, taking note of the same, this court assesses the ..... income of the deceased at rs.40,000/- per annum. there is no dispute with regard to age of the deceased as 57 year and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
..... to be saddled on the insurance company to pay compensation to the claimants.17. insofar as quantum of compensation, the tribunal has assessed income of the deceased at rs.3,000/- per month. as per second schedule appended to the mv act, maximum income of deceased is fixed at rs.40,000/- per annum. hence, taking note of the same, this court assesses the ..... income of the deceased at rs.40,000/- per annum. there is no dispute with regard to age of the deceased as 57 year and .....
Tag this Judgment!