The appellant was employed as a Physical Education Teacher with the respondent No.3 School since 04.07.1983 and was granted a PGT scale with effect from 01.08.2001. He was on 23.07.2008 charged with having committed gross misconduct by giving corpora..
Facts, in brief, as per the relevant orders are that return declaring income of `1,92,16,940/- filed on 29-09-2009 by the assessee, providing consultancy of automotive components, was selected for scrutiny with the service of notice u/s 143(2) of the..
Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a commercial bank having its Head Office in U.A.E. The assessee has two branches in India i.e. Mumbai and Bangalore. It is involved in normal banking activities including financing of foreign ..
The petitioner who in the year 1985 joined BSF as a Constable has filed the present writ petition seeking prayer for quashing the order of dismissal dated 7th October, 1996 passed by a Summary Security Force Court by the Comdt. 25 Bn BSF on a charge ..
There are several ground raised by Revenue as well as assessee please check the judgment to obtain the fact of the case. ..
The origin of the claim was traced in the decision to employees of DTC having filed a petition in the Supreme Court praying that DTC be directed to frame and bring into operation a pension scheme. DTC gave an assurance to the Supreme Court that it wo..
On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), CIT(A) is bad, both in the eyes of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred, both ..
Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of ``1,19,38,802/- filed on 28.10.2005 by the assessee, a partnership firm carrying on the profession of Ophthalmology surgeons, was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, ..
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has declared long term capital gains of `.1,28,258,902/- out of which long term capital gain, of `.3,75,902/- pertained to listed shares. The entire LTCG was claimed as exempt under section 10(38) includi..
The petitioners had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the respondent MCD on the averments that plaintiff No. 2 (petitioner No. 2 herein) is the owner of plot in Khasra No. 262, 258 & 217/4 in village Bharola, Delhi, but, t..
This is a suit for declaration and injunction. The plaintiff claims to be the true and authentic sports federation formed in the year 1977 for promoting sports of “Throw Ball‟ in the country. The plaintiff was registered at Jind, Haryana, vide regist..
facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring nil income, after set off of business loss of ``568,87,510/- , filed on 31.10.2005 by the assessee, engaged in the business of publishing of telephone directory with yellow pages, was ..
In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Multiplan India (P) Ltd.; 38 ITD 320 (Del), the appeal filed by the revenue before the Tribunal, which was fixed for hearing. But on the date of hearing nobody represented the revenue/appellant nor any co..
The Appellant herein as landlord filed a suit for eviction against the respondent company on the ground of default in making payment of the rents and also on grounds of reasonable requirement, in the City Civil Court at Calcutta, under the provisions..
The learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing Rs. 25.00 lacs, on ad hoc basis, towards share trading expenses on erroneous assumption that the appellant has incurred expenditure towards speculation business and allocated on proportion basis ..
The facts in brief are that the assessee for the assessment year 1999-00 had declared long term capital loss of Rs.4,01,75,013/- on sale of shares which had been set off against short term capital gain from sale of shares of Rs.3,98,40,597/- and thus..
It is alleged that on 02.02.2010 Craig Mcleod grossly misbehaved on campus with two Professors of the University. As a result of the incident, a First Information Report was lodged with the police and the Proctorial Board of the University took an em..
The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 47,59,846/- being payment made to the sub-contractors on the ground that identification of these sub-contractors are not proved without properly appreciating the facts of the case and law applic..
Facts indicate that Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,98,64,646/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act against which assessee preferred appeal in which action of he Assessing Officer in regard to addition u/s 68 of the Act was challenge..
These cases were listed for hearing before the Tribunal on 06-8-2012 and for this assessee was informed. Today i.e. on 06-8-2012 when the case was called on board, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment has been filed..
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
