Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: income tax act 1961 section 35cc omitted Court: sebi securities and exchange board of india or securities appellate tribunal sat Page 1 of about 35 results (0.076 seconds)

Sms Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2004)49SCL117SAT

..... . he cited the observation made by the hon'ble supreme court in another case also(commissioner of income tax, patna v sahu jain (1976) 2 scc 510) relating to interpretation of the provisions of section 23a(1) of the income tax act, 1922 - "having regard to the intimate relationship of the shareholders without the least evidence of any disconcert amongst them, the ordinary expectation for individual profit in commercial undertakings, natural reluctance ..... made in the context of interpreting section 23.a (1) of the income tax act, as it stood at that ..... rights in the target company, to file with the french market authority (with copy to the target company) the abovementioned notification for crossing legal thresholds and a statement of intent (section 356-1 of french companies act); (ii) pursuant to the same section of the companies act, that statement of intent is binding on the declaring company for the twelve months from its date, and the stated intent may only be altered in the event of a " ..... the acquisition of coflexip in july, 2001(much before the amended regulation), what they were not required to do under the 1997 regulations (which were in force in july 2001), that whilst section 30 of the act empowers sebi to make regulations, and whilst section 21 of the general clauses act, 1897 empowers the sebi to amend such regulations from time to time, and no power is conferred on it either expressly or by necessary implication, to make regulations with retrospective effect .....

Sundaram Finance Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)42SCL521SAT

..... to provisions of section 271(1)(a) of the income-tax act. ..... section 271(1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income ..... was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied"? 52. ..... income-tax (supra), which is a reiteration of the ratio in the gujarat travancore agency's case (supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income-tax and the sebi act. ..... noted that the board has the power to appoint adjudicating officer to adjudge the failure specified in clause (a) of section 15a of the act, and that the failure to file the report with sebi under regulation 3(4) attracts the penal provisions provided in ..... time limit is as follows: "3(4) in respect of acquisition under clauses (a), (b), (c), (e) and (i) of sub-section (1) the acquirer shall, within 21 days of the date of acquisition, submit a report along with supporting documents to the board giving all details, in respect of acquisitions which (taken together with shares or voting rights if any, held by him or persons acting in concert with him) would entitle such person to exercise 15 per cent or more of the voting rights .....

Mr. Satyadeva Prakash Sinha, Ms. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)4CompLJ491SAT

..... these two decisions are with specific reference to provisions of section 271(i)(a) of the income tax act. ..... by the board of directors of the company on 28.1.2000 is the resolution stated to have been forwarded to the concerned stock exchanges: "resolved that subject to the approval of the members pursuant to the provisions of section 81(1a) and such other applicable provisions, if any, of the companies act, 1956, reserve bank of india, securities & exchange board of india, and subject to compliance with relevant provisions of the guidelines for preferential allotment of shares, sebi (substantial acquisition of shares and takeovers ..... the said section 271 (1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income. ..... the observation of the court cited above was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied?" 16. ..... supreme court decision in additional commissioner of income tax (supra), which is a reiteration of the ratio in the gujarat travancore agency case(supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income tax and the sebi act. .....

Sundaram Finance Ltd., Wheels Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of Ind ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)3CompLJ145SAT

..... two decisions are with specific reference to provisions of section 271(i)(a) of the income tax act. ..... said section 271 (1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income. ..... observation of the court cited above was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied?" 50. ..... decision in additional commissioner of income tax (supra), which is a reiteration of the ratio in the gujarat travancore agency case(supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income tax and the sebi act. ..... that in fact the delay involved in filing the report by the housing development finance corporation was 286 days and in that case the adjudicating officer, had held that the failure was in terms of section 15a(b) of the act and imposed rs.150000 as monetary penalty in terms of the show cause notice issued for the violation of the said sub ..... it is noted that the board has the power to appoint adjudicating officer to adjudge the failure specified in clause (a) of section 15a of the act, and that the failure to file the report with sebi under regulation 3(4) attracts the penal provisions provided in the said clause .....

Satyadeva Prakash Sinha Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)44SCL381SAT

..... section 271(1)(a) of the income-tax act. ..... reason of such alleged non-disclosure.learned counsel submitted that the adjudicating officer has ignored the factors required to be taken into consideration for the purpose of imposition of penalty as provided in section 15j of the act that while adjudging the quantum of penalty the adjudicating officer should have due regard to the fact as to whether any disproportionate gain or unfair advantage has been derived as a result ..... the company on 28-1-2000 is the resolution stated to have been forwarded to the concerned stock exchanges: "resolved that subject to the approval of the members pursuant to the provisions of section 81(1a) and such other applicable provisions, if any, of the companies act, 1956, reserve bank of india, securities & exchange board of india, and subject to compliance with relevant provisions of the guidelines for preferential allotment of shares, sebi (substantial acquisition ..... section 271(1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income-tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income ..... to the question 'whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied? ..... to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income-tax and the sebi act. .....

Doogar and Associates Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)48SCL115SAT

..... are with specific reference to provisions of section 271(i)(a) of the income tax act. ..... section 271 (1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income ..... court cited above was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied? ..... the court cited above was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied? ..... referred to the detailed findings recorded by the adjudicating officer in the order that "for arriving at the quantum of penalty which may be imposed, i take note of the factors as laid down in section 15j of the said act and sub rule (2) of rule 5 of the sebi rules, the facts and circumstances of the case and the mitigating factors as submitted by doogar & associates and discussed hereinbelow. ..... to satisfy that the violation deserved punishment.supreme court decision in additional commissioner of income tax (supra), which is a reiteration of the ratio in the gujarat travancore agency case(supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income tax and the sebi act. .....

Toubro Infotech and Industries Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of In ...

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2005)3CompLJ305SAT

..... 'circular' is not defined in the income-tax act just as 'guidelines' are not in the sebi act. ..... perused the income-tax act. ..... 'guidelines' where some judicial pronouncement is available in the form of case law is that of 'circulars' under the income-tax act. ..... following matters, namely :-- (a) the times and places of meetings of the board and the procedure to be followed at such meetings under sub-section (1) of section 7 including the quorum necessary for the transaction of business; (b) the term and other conditions of service of officers and employees of the board under sub-section (2) of section 9; (c) the matters relating to issue of capital, transfer of securities and other matters incidental thereto and the manner in which such matters shall ..... not be lawful to issue any form of application for shares in or debentures of a company unless the form is issued with a prospectus which complies with the requirements of this section : provided that this sub-section shall not apply if it is shown that the form of application was issued either - (a) in connection with a bona fide invitation to a person to enter into an underwriting agreement with respect to the shares or debentures; or (b) in relation to ..... ito [1981] 131 itr 597, 7 taxman 13 pronounced that circulars are binding on income tax authorities and further they are in the nature of contemporanea expositio and are alegitimate aid ..... previous approval of the central government" were omitted by act 9 of 1995 with effect from 25-1-1995. .....

Kensigton Investment Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... are with specific reference to provisions of section 271(i)(a) of the income tax act. ..... section 271 (1)(a) provides that a penalty may be imposed if the income tax officer is satisfied that any person has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of income ..... the court cited above was in answer to the question "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied?" 61. ..... in additional commissioner of income tax (supra), which is a reiteration of the ratio in the gujarat travancore agency case(supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income tax and the sebi act. ..... of the said case leading to the above observation by the court is as follows: "in proceedings for assessment of tax under the orissa sales tax act, 1947, the sales tax officer held that the company was a dealer in building material, and had sold the material to contractors and was on that account liable to pay tax at the appropriate rates under the orissa sales tax act. ..... had observed: "having regard to the plurability of its meaning, the sense in which the expression is used in different sections, and even clauses, must be ascertained from the context of the scheme of the act, the language of the provision and the object intended to be served thereby." 31. .....

Kishore Rajaram Chhabria Vs. the Chairman Securities and

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

Reported in : (2003)46SCL385SAT

..... sc 768: this reported case was in connection with section 23(a)(1) of the income tax act 1922. ..... bind persons who are not parties to the agreement, that for violation of any provisions of the listing agreement only the provisions of scra would be applicable, that section 23(2) of the said act prescribed penalty for violation of the listing agreement, that the said section was put in scra on 25.1.1995, that as per the scra even today the listing agreement is not legally binding on any other person than the listed company, ..... regulation 44 of the 1997 regulations--directions by the board -- the board may, in the interest of the securities market, without prejudice to its rights to initiate action including criminal prosecution under section 24 of the act give such directions as it deems fit including - b prohibiting the person concerned from disposing of any of the securities acquired in violation of these regulations; c directing the person concerned to sell the shares acquired in violation of the ..... the hon'ble supreme court inter alia held that non compliance with the provisions of the statute by omitting to do what the act enjoins will be anything done or ordered to be done under the act.101. ..... "anything done" would include "anything omitted to be done" under the regulations. ..... imfa had omitted to make the said public offer in accordance with the said regulations and therefore under the provisions of regulation 47 sebi was entitled to proceed against imfa and the persons in control of .....

Yogi Sungwon (India) Ltd. Vs. Securities and Exchange Board of

Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT

..... these two decisions are with specific reference to provisions of section 271(1)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961. ..... the observation of the court cited above was in answer to the question : "whether the tribunal is right in holding that the penalties under section 12(5) of the act (orissa sales-tax act, 1947) had been rightly levied ?" 24. ..... agency's case (supra) relied on by the respondent to show that it is not necessary to prove mens rea for imposing penalty is not relevant to the present case in view of the distinguishable nature of the relevant provisions under the income-tax and the sebi act. ..... the background of the said case leading to the above observation by the court is as follows : " in proceedings for assessment of tax under the orissa sales-tax act, 1947, the sales-tax officer held that the company was a dealer in building material, and had sold the material to contractors and was on that account liable to pay tax at the appropriate rates under the orissa sales-tax act. ..... the adjudicating officer so appointed, after holding inquiry came to the conclusion that the appellant had failed to comply with the requirements of section 15a(b) of the securities and exchange board of india act, 1992 ('the act') and imposed rupees two lakhs as monetary penalty against the appellant. ..... yet another legal issue raised by the appellant is the scope of section 15-i read with section 15j of the act, empowering the adjudicating officer to impose monetary penalty.18. .....