Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents amendment act 2002 section 32 amendment of section 67 Court: delhi Year: 2005 Page 9 of about 83 results (0.136 seconds)

Sep 16 2005 (TRI)

Sanat Products Ltd. and Lucky Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Sep-16-2005

Reported in : (2007)107TTJ(Delhi)238

..... set aside were vested in the cit(a), which have been taken away w.e.f.1st june, 2001 by an amendment made by finance act, 2001. now in respect of first two points discussed above, i.e., whenever some additions are confirmed or deleted the ..... vide another order dt. 3rd feb., 1999. it was also contended that ao could have passed only one order under section 250 to amend his order dt. 29th march, 1996. he again referred to p. 69, which is a copy of the appeal effect order ..... the appellate authority in accordance with the power under section 250 [to be redone under section 143(3) or 144 in its original amendment]. in this regard reliance was also placed on the decision of bangalore bench of the tribunal in case of asstt. cit v. ..... totally justified.16. we have considered the rival submissions carefully and have gone through the relevant material on record. section 30 of the it act, 1961 reads as under: 30. in respect of rent, rates, taxes, repairs and insurance for premises, used for the purposes of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 2005 (TRI)

Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. Vs. Cce [Alongwith Appeal No.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Nov-18-2005

Reported in : (2005)(190)ELT301TriDel

..... ltd. v. collector of central excise, ahmedabad , was cited to point out that it was held in paragraph 10 of the judgment that when rules were amended, a fiction was created that any article produced or manufactured, if captively consumed was statutorily presumed to satisfy the test of marketability and this presumption could be rebutted ..... amount to manufacture. it was submitted that the decisions taking a contrary view in structurals and machineries bokara pvt. ltd. v. cce, patnaarti steels v. cce reported in 2002 (144) elt 360 and richardson & cruddas (1972) ltd v. cce reported in 1988 (38) elt 176 (3 judges) were no longer binding because the supreme court ..... ground before erecting the structures at the site. it was submitted that having regard to the definition of "factory" in section 2(e) of the central excise act, "factory" means any premises including the precincts thereof, wherein or in any part of which, the excisable goods are manufacture or any manufacturing process connected with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 30 2005 (TRI)

Shri Shahid Atiq L/H of Late Sh. Vs. Income-tax Officer

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Delhi

Decided on : Jun-30-2005

Reported in : (2005)98TTJ(Delhi)971

..... issue already adjudicated by the tribunal i.e. validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the income-tax act and consequently the validity of the assessment order, part "b" relates to remedy for issuing additional directions by amending the order of the tribunal. we will take up these two parts separately in the following manner: part "a" ..... this regard has been clarified by the hon'ble delhi high court in the cases of ms. deeksha suri and ors. v. itat and ors. ; karan & co. v. itat (2002) 253 itr 131 (del.); and cit v. vichtra construction (p) ltd.cit v. vichtra construction (p) ltd. (supra), the hon'ble high court has held as under: " ..... 11) without recalling or reviewing the order, on issues already adjudicated by the tribunal, the omission or error on the part of itat can be corrected or rectified by amending and adding something to it without subtracting anything from the main order. (12) there is legal obligation on the part of itat to rectify errors committed by the authorities .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //