After hearing the rival submissions and on careful perusal of materials available on record keeping in view of the fact that since the assessment year involved in this appeal is relating to A.Yr. 2004-05 as per the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High..
The appellant, which is a private limited company was entrusted by seventeen joint owners of the premises known as “Industry House” at No.10, Camac Street, Calcutta – 700 017 (for short, ”the said premises”), to look after the day -to- day management..
Whether the Haryana Housing Board (for short, `the Board’) could ignore the time limit of 7 years specified in clause 2(w) of the Hire Purchase Tenancy Agreement executed by the appellants as per the requirement of Regulation 11(4) of the Housing Boa..
On 6th December, 2008, the Respondent No.1, husband, filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Case No.609 of 2008) against the Petitioner, for restitution of conjugal rights. Unable to bear the shock of the incidents, whi..
The short issue involved in these appeals is: whether common expenses incurred by an assessee can be allocated towards taxable and non-taxable income under the provisions of Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the „I.T..
Under the Detention Order No.Cril/NSA/No.10 of 2011, Imphal, the 31st January, 2011, issued by the District Magistrate, Imphal West District, Manipur, the Appellant’s husband, Yumman Somendro @ Somo @ Tiken, was detained under the provisions of the N..
Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of Trading in Electric Motors, Fans, Laboratory equipments and generation of Wind Power filed return declaring total income at Rs.11,60,151/-. During the course..
I do not find any force in this contention of learned senior counsel that the plaintiff had acquiesced in the defendants use of trademarks/ trade name for a period of more than twenty one years after the plaintiff acquired the ownership of trademarks..
When the matter was called on for hearing, nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any application for adjournment filed. From the acknowledgement-cum-notice, it is transpired that the assessee’s representative has noted the date of hearing..
These appeals filed against judgment dated 22.2.1999 of the learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court represent culmination of the dispute among the heirs of Shri D. Yellappa, who died intestate on 27.03.1978, in relation to his properties...
The questions which arise for consideration in this appeal are whether the Government of NCT of Delhi could have invoked Section 17(1) and (4) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, ‘the Act’) and dispensed with the rule of hearing embodied in..
According to the appellants when the house in question was purchased by them the respondent was occupying two shops facing the road and two rooms situate at the rear of the said shops as a tenant of the previous landlord at the rent of Rs.35/- per mo..
The appellant herein is the Coal Mines Provident Fund Commissioner through the Board of Trustees, constituted under Section 3 of the Coal Mines Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, CMPF Organisation, Dhanbad. The Respondent was appointed ..
The legality of the detention order dated January 10, 2011 was challenged by the present appellant, who is son of the detenu, in the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad Bench, Aurangabad. The Division Bench of that Court dismissed the Criminal Writ Petit..
According to the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, for getting registration of a trade mark, an application is required to be filed in accordance with the provisions incorporated in the said Act. Such an application is required to be advertised and ..
Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271D for the assessment year 2004-05 in respect of M/s. J.A. Land & Housing Dev. India Limited and also in assessment years 2005-06 & 2006-07, as well as under section 271E of the Income Tax Act for the..
Facts in brief are that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction of Rs.64,41,673 on account of loss being exchange difference on refund of customer’s advance. It was also notic..
The captioned appeals being three (3) in number are directed against a common judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 22.02.2008 ITA No.1367/2008 relates to Assessment Year 1991-1992; ITA No.1..
The respondent/ plaintiff presented suit claiming the declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to a deed of conveyance in respect of plot of land admeasuring 3,250 sq.yards equivalent to 2,717 sq.meters bearing Survey No.27, Hissa No.1 correspondin..
The assessee is a public charitable trust. It is registered u/s 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act. Its income is eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act subject to the conditions specified therein. In the income and expenditure account submitted by the a..
Member Strength 9,48,114 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
