Res - Judgment Search Results
Mangalchand Mohanlal Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1951
Reported in: [1952]21ITR164(All)
Act is as follows :-'Whether on the facts found by the Tribunal Dina Nath and Amarnath as the respective members of Ram Bharosey and Ram Sarups branches could represent and bind the other members of their Hindu
L. H. Sugar Factories and Oil Mills Ltd. Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1951
Reported in: [1952]21ITR325(All)
a mistake a referring to Section 10(2)(xv) instead of to Section 10(2)(v). Section 10(2)(v) is as follows :-'In respect of current repairs of such buildings, machinery, plant or furniture, the amount paid on account thereof;'Learned counsel has
Chaturbhuj and Co. Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: [1960]39ITR337(All)
Act or the basis for it should have been only the excess profits tax which was avoided in respect of the chargeable accounting period in question namely Rs. 2,947-5-0 ?2. Whether in face of the fact that
18-section briefs on any result in this list
Hindustan Commercial Bank Ltd. Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1952
Reported in: [1952]21ITR353(All)
Court :-'Whether in the circumstances and on the facts of the case, the sum of Rs. 89,870 in respect of expenses incurred in opening offices of the bank was an admissible deduction under Section 10(2)(xii) now Section
Ram Kumar Ramniwas of Nanpara Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1952
Reported in: [1952]22ITR474(All)
joint Hindu family as such can enter into a partnership. It is difficult to understand how such a result can be derived from the decision in Lachhman Dass case or from the quotation given above. As a
Udayram Jagannath Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1950
Reported in: [1951]19ITR222(All)
fact, the learned Judges of the Madras High Court went to the length of holding that any other result would be unthinkable. See G. M. Madappa v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras. A similar question arose before a
Lalli Ram Sunderlal Jhansi Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1950
Reported in: [1951]19ITR372(All)
The following question has been refereed to us by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act for our opinion :-'Whether, in the circumstances of the case and on a...
Kishan Parshad and Co., Ltd., Ambala Vs. Re.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Jun-18-1951
Reported in: [1952]21ITR303(P& H)
contract with the assessee company to buy their shares and an injunction had been issued by the Court restraining the assessee company from selling their remaining shares. When the injuction was discharged in the year 1943 the
Lala Lachhman Dass Nayar and Others Vs. Re.
Court: Punjab and Haryana
Decided on: Sep-15-1952
Reported in: [1952]22ITR418(P& H)
which had been filed by the firms as constituted except for the year 1941-42. Later on as a result of proceedings being taken under Section 34 of the income-tax act the total income of the firm except
The Central Talkies Circuit, Matunga, Vs. Re.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR44(Bom)
... 2'7. Charity ... 1 anna.Thereafter there came the amendment of Section 16(3) of the Income-tax Act, in respect of the shares standing in the names of a wife and minor son of a partner. On that
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Hover bars for counts · drag or use +/− to zoom · click a bar to filter by year
AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free