Loading High Court cases…
93 orders · Page 1 of 2
The Court ordered the disposal of these pending cases without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival or file fresh petitions if a cause still survives.
The Court ordered the disposal of these pending cases without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival or file fresh petitions if a cause still survives.
The Court ordered the disposal of these pending cases without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival or file fresh petitions if a cause still survives.
The Court ordered the disposal of these pending cases without prejudice to the rights of the parties. Parties were granted liberty to seek revival or file fresh petitions if a cause still survives.
The High Court upheld the ITAT's decision, finding that the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the assessee's additional evidence (partner confirmation letters and land holdings) because the partnership deed lacked capital contribution details and the deposits were made into the assessee's personal account, not the firm's. The Tribunal's reasoning for the Rs. 33,00,000/- addition was deemed in accordance with law.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the court.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Department) to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw its appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw its appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed before the tribunal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the Income Tax Tribunal Appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court permitted the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was based on the tax effect involved being below the monetary limits prescribed for filing appeals.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Income Tax Department) to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw its appeal. Consequently, the appeal filed before the Income Tax Tribunal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Income Tax Department) to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Income Tax Department) to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was based on a certificate stating the tax effect was below the monetary limits for appeals.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw its appeal. The withdrawal was based on a certificate indicating the tax effect was below the monetary limits for appeals.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw its appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was based on a certificate stating that the tax effect involved was below the monetary limits for filing appeals.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Income Tax Department) to withdraw the appeal. The withdrawal was based on a certificate indicating the tax effect was below the monetary limits for appeal.
The High Court granted permission to the appellant (Income Tax Department) to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to the Income Tax Department to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court, upon being informed by the appellant's counsel that the appellant wished to withdraw the appeal, granted permission for the withdrawal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with the liberty granted for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.
The High Court observed that the appellant was not present and therefore not interested in pursuing the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The High Court granted the liberty as prayed for by the appellant. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel regarding withdrawal due to monetary limits as per a CBIC circular. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the Court.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court noted that the withdrawal was in accordance with the monetary limits prescribed by a CBIC Circular.
The High Court recorded the submission made by the Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court, recording the submission of the learned counsel for the Income Tax Department, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. No order as to costs was made.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The court also noted that the withdrawal was based on CBIC circular regarding monetary limits.
The High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the insurance company. However, it modified and enhanced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in both cases.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Income Tax Department's counsel that the appeal was to be withdrawn due to monetary limits as per a CBIC circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel that they wished to withdraw the appeal. Based on this submission, the Court dismissed the appeal.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Income Tax Department's counsel that the appeal was to be withdrawn due to monetary limits as per a CBIC circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
The High Court granted permission to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn based on the Department's submission regarding monetary limits and instructions from the CBIC.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel that the appeal was being withdrawn due to monetary limits prescribed by a CBIC circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Department's counsel that the appeal was to be withdrawn due to monetary limits prescribed by a CBIC circular. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court noted the submission by the Income Tax Department's counsel regarding instructions to withdraw the appeal due to monetary limits. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.
The Court noted the submission by the Income Tax Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal of the appeal due to monetary limits as per CBIC Circular No.5 of 2024. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court noted that the appellant had availed the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and paid the disputed tax. Consequently, there was nothing left for adjudication.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Income Tax Department's counsel regarding the withdrawal of the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court recorded the submission of the Income Tax Department's counsel that the appeal was to be withdrawn. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.
The High Court, based on the submission of the Income Tax Department, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The withdrawal was due to the tax effect being covered by a National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) decision.