Sri M.Bala Narasimha Reddy, vs. Income Tax Officer,

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

• The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -3 vs Decent Financials Services Pvt. Ltd
  Delhi24 Nov 2022Partly Allowed

  Also relies on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur and 1 other authority

  The tribunal found the bus driver negligent and awarded compensation. The High Court enhanced the compensation by including future prospects and adjusted the interest rate, while upholding the deduction for personal expe...

• Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs M/S Jay Auto Components Ltd
  Delhi26 Sept 2022Partly Allowed

  Also relies on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur and 1 other authority

  The tribunal modified the compensation amount, enhancing it by increasing future prospects and loss of consortium. The rate of interest awarded was deemed reasonable.

• Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-8 vs M/S Shruti Fastners Ltd
  Delhi4 Dec 2018Partly Allowed

  Also relies on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur and 1 other authority

  The Tribunal erred in not relying on the deceased's Income Tax Return, which was filed prior to the accident. The compensation was re-determined based on the Income Tax Return and established legal precedents for convent...

• Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs Academy of Oral Implantology
  Delhi14 Feb 2017Partly Allowed

  Also relies on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur and 1 other authority

  The High Court upheld the deceased's income as assessed by the Tribunal. However, it modified the award by reducing future prospects to 40% and recalculating conventional heads (loss of consortium, loss of estate, funera...

• Commissioner of Income Tax- TDS vs M/S. A.P.Power Generation Corporation Ltd
  Telangana25 Jan 2017Partly Allowed

  Also relies on United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur and 1 other authority

  The tribunal found the accident was caused by the negligence of respondent no. 1 and awarded compensation. The High Court partly allowed the appeal, reducing the compensation amount, and dismissed the cross-objections.