Iv - Judgment Search Results

Virudambal and 4 Others Vs. Kandasamy and 4 Others

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2000(2)CTC263; (2000)IIMLJ287

1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), they preferred the present revision before this court. Petitioners 2 to 4 herein are daughters of the first petitioner. 5th petitioner is the grand-daughter of the first petitioner. They filed

R.Narayanan and 4 others Vs Tmt. Supriya Sahu I.A.S., and 4 others

Court: Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 23-01-2026CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN1. R.Narayanan2. C.Lakshimi3. E.Uma4. G.Arul5. Thanigachalam ..Petitioner(s) Vs1. Supriya Sahu I.A.S., The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Health and Welfare Department, Fort...

D.P.Anto and 4 Others Vs. Fr.Rajesh MartIn and 4 Others

Court: Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI MONDAY, THE13H DAY OF JANUARY201423RD POUSHA, 1935 WP(C).No. 34496 of 2010 (J) ---------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. D.P.ANTO, SON OF DOMINIC, KIDARAPOIKA...

S. Purushotham and 4 ors. Vs. the State of A.P. Rep. by Its Chief Secr ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2006(5)ALD642

Deputy secretaries to the Government (Non-cadre) other than Law and Finance and Planning (Finance) Departments and under Category 4(c) are the Assistant Secretaries to the Government other than Law and Finance and Planning (Finance) Department. While Section

Venkata Ramana Agencies, Rep. by Its Mg. Partner K.V. Sudhakar Rao and ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: 2003(2)ALD636; 2002(6)ALT100

the amounts were in fact sent by way of drafts to the companies, question of respondents 1,2 and 4 enriching themselves by misappropriating amount belonging to the revision petitioners does not arise.5. There can be no dispute

Raghavjibhai Narsinhbhai Patel and 4 Ors. Vs. Amroli Anjuman Fund Thr' ...

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: AIR2006Guj78

The above order of the Joint Charity Commissioner has been challenged in two appeals, being Appeal (AS)Nos. and 4 of 2005. Appeal (AS) No. 3 of 2005 is filed by the present appellants, whereas Appeal (AS) No.

Bombay Burmah Trading Corporation Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: (1983)32CTR(Bom)306; [1984]145ITR793(Bom); [1983]12TAXMAN178(Bom)

contended that overseas employees of the assessee-company did not have any income chargeable to Indian Income-tax under Chap. IV A of the I.T. Act, 1961 or, in other words, income chargeable under the head 'Salaries' in their

Commissioner of Welath-tax, Gujarat-iv Vs. H.H. Maharaja F.P. Gaekwad

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: (1982)28CTR(Guj)158; [1983]144ITR304(Guj)

to note that the assessee has shown capital gains arising out of the aforesaid sale transaction in Part IV of his returns of income for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1973-74. Capital gains arising out of the

Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat-iv, Ahmedabad Vs. Trinity Traders

Court: Gujarat

Reported in: [1987]163ITR381(Guj)

the two questions which we have hereinabove respectively set out have been referred to us for our opinion. 4. Under section 40A, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in sections 30 to 39, the amounts set out in

Col. Ivs Gahlot Vs. Union of India .

Court: Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8047 Of 2018 (@ C.A.Diary No.34810/2015) COL. IVS GAHLOT ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.This appeal has been filed questioning the