These are appeals by way of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution against the judgment and orders of the Bombay High Court holding that the entire amount received by an assessee on sale of the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (for short ‘the ..
After considering the rival submissions we find that additions on which penalty has been levied u/s.271(1)© have been restored to the file of the AO by the Tribunal in I.T.A.No.6065/Mum/07 [copy of order filed on record]. Therefore, we are of the vie..
Facts in brief are that the AO during the assessment proceedings noticed that the assessee had earned dividend income of Rs.14,16,221/- which was exempt from tax but the assessee had not disallowed any expenses relating to said income. He, therefore,..
The ld. Assessing Officer has resorted to Rule 8D while calculating the disallowance u/s 14A in respect of exempted dividend income of Rs. 1,27,16,222/- at a sum of Rs. 16,02,548/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (A) where it..
It needs to be noted here that a legal entity — a natural person or an artificial person — can sue or be sued in his/its own name in a court of law or a tribunal. It is not merely a procedural there are special provisions in the Constitution and the..
The petitioner made several prayers, but, as of now, this petition is limited to the quashing of the ACR in respect of the petitioner for the year 2008, whereby the petitioner was graded as ‘B’. This would be evident from the order dated 06.07.2010 p..
The assessee is an oil exploration company and is engaged in extraction and sale of crude oil from PY-3 Block in the Cauveri Offshore area. The assessee claimed that it was an industrial undertaking eligible for 100% deduction of its profits derived ..
This intra-Court appeal impugns the judgment dated 18th January, 2011 allowing W.P.(C) No. 5093/1998 preferred by the respondents no.1 to 3 herein and quashing the “Regulations of Membership” of the appellant to the extent the same were held to be in..
The facts of this case very briefly are that Bharat Rasayan Limited (for short ‘the assessee’) filed a return of income tax claiming a deduction of Rs.72,76,405/- under Section 80HHC of the Act. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer held tha..
In a suit for a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the trademark “Arnimax” and passing off goods under the said trademark, this application has been filed for interim reliefs. In the 1st week of October, 2009,..
On the observation of the detailed case we can find the following fact from the judgment..... i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in deleting the additions made on account of provision gratuity u/s..
On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that clause(b) of the Explanation(1) of Sec. 11 5JB provides that for calculating book profit the profit as shown in the profit and loss account has to be ..
On the observation the following facts are found:- i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in l aw the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition to total income of Rs.5,00,000/- received as gift on 23rd August, 2004 which ..
The assessee is under the Ministry of Shipping, Govt. of India. Assessee’s business is in ship building, ship repairing and general engineering. The ld. A.O. made an addition of Rs. 2 crores, which was stated as received from Government for upkeep of..
This Court - dealt with Contempt Petition Nos. 41 – 44 of 2011 filed by the petitioner and passed certain directions including that the Labour Secretary of the concerned States should be present in the Court on the next date of hearing. Thereafter, v..
The facts in brief are that the assessee company was engaged in the business of undertaking contracts for providing various liaison activities in telecommunication strategy had entered into contract dated 5.1.2005 with M/s. ZTE Corporation, a Chinese..
The appeal was fixed for hearing today i.e. on 1st February, 2012. No one is present on behalf of assessee. Nor there is any application for adjournment. In view of above, it appears that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Hence t..
When the appeal was called for hearing, a letter dated 27.1.2012 signed by the assessee was placed before us, wherein the assessee sought permission to withdraw the appeal. It is mentioned in the letter received on 27.1.2012 as under: “I request w..
Facts: Appellant got registration as a pharmacist with the Sikkim State Pharmacy Tribunal. On the basis of this registration from Sikkim, he applied for his registration with the Pharmacy Council of the State of Rajasthan which enrolled him as a reg..
This Intra-Court Appeal impugns the judgment dated 31st August, 2007 of the learned Single Judge allowing WP(C) No. 469/2005 preferred by the respondent no.1 and directing the appellant to restore the LPG distributorship to the respondent no.1 and to..
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
