Chandar Ruhidas v. Chandan Kumar Sarkar

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Idea Cellular Limited

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

…Page 10 of 48 7.5 Having regard to the fact the 1999 (Amended) TM Act provides a complete machinery concerning both rights and remedies, no remedy would lie outside the provisions of the Statute. [Dipak Chandar Ruhidas vs. Chandan Kumar Sarkar (2003) 7 SCC 66, para 15 and 16]. 7.6 An intra-court appeal by way of LPA need not be expressly excluded. The same conclusion can be reached if the court finds, having regard to the history of the statute and its provisions, that the legislature did not intend to provide for an intra-court appeal. [See Upadhayaya Hargovind Devshanker vs. Dhirendrasingh Virbha…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. DIMPLE MURARKA

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA,MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA

…Page 10 of 48 7.5 Having regard to the fact the 1999 (Amended) TM Act provides a complete machinery concerning both rights and remedies, no remedy would lie outside the provisions of the Statute. [Dipak Chandar Ruhidas vs. Chandan Kumar Sarkar (2003) 7 SCC 66, para 15 and 16]. 7.6 An intra-court appeal by way of LPA need not be expressly excluded. The same conclusion can be reached if the court finds, having regard to the history of the statute and its provisions, that the legislature did not intend to provide for an intra-court appeal. [See Upadhayaya Hargovind Devshanker vs. Dhirendrasingh Virbha…

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI KOUNDINYA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

Bench: C.PRAVEEN KUMAR,CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

…WCA Civ 690, [2002] W.L.R. 2601 at 2607, para. 18, C.A. (England & Wales) 46. (2016) 6 Supreme Court Cases 766 47. 170 C.L.R. 394 48. (1988) 4 SCC 669 49. (1992) 4 SCC 477] 50. (1993) 1. S.C.C. 71 51. (1993) 3 SCC 499] 52. (1997) 7 SCC 592 53. (1998) 7 SCC 66 54. [1956] 1 All ER 256; 62 TLR 557 55. (1877)2 App Case 439 CJ, MSM,J and DVSS,J W.P.Nos.13203 of 2020 & batch 4 56. (1854) 5 HL Cas 185, 10 ER 868 (PC) 57. (1883) LR 9 App Case 605 58. AIR 1968 SC 718 59. (1979) 2 SCC 409 60. (2004) 7 SCC 673 61. (1995) 6 SCC 53 62. (2006) 3 SCC 620 63. (2011) 3 SCC 193 64. (2004) 6 SCC 465 65…

The Commissioner of Income Tax - II vs. M/s. Kumar Raja Associates

In the result, all the Tax Revision

Bench: Floor, Opp.Gurudware Bus Stop, Th Stat, 0/O.Meghana Towers, 4 Visakhapatnam. ... Petitioner & M/S.Pulp-N-Pack [P] Limited, Tadimalla ... Respondent : Sri T.C.D.Sekhar, Gp For Commercial Tax Counsel For The Respondent : Sri S Suribabu, Representing On Behalf Of Sri S R R Viswanath Counsel For The Petitioner

…as "shall be deemed to be". In the present case, the deeming provision in the explanation being in negative, applying the ratio as laid down in the case of Corporation Bank (supra), we hold that such deeming provision in the 'explanation', limits or 31 (2003) 7 SCC 66 44 RNT, J & HN, J TREVC. No. 83 of 2008 & batch restricts the general exemption. In other words, an exemption from tax which may be a general exemption for the purposes of the State Act may not be a general exemption for the purposes of Central Sales Tax Act if the exemption is only in specified circumstances or under specified conditions. Under S…

M/S MYSORE POLYMERS & RUBBER PRODUCTS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES

In the result, writ appeal No

Bench: D.V.SHYLENDRA KUMAR,B.S.INDRAKALA

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE 2013 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.S. INDRAKALA STRP NO. 112/2008 C/W STA NO.11/2008, 12/2008, WRIT APPEAL NO.1260/2006 (T-KST) STRP NO. 112/2008 BETWEEN: M/s. Mysore Polymers & Rubber Products Ltd., No.20-P, K.R.S. Road, Metagalli Post, Mysore-570 016. (By Sri. C.D. Nagarajan, Managing Director-69 years) …Petitioner (By Sri. T. N. Keshavamurthy, Advocate) AND: The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Vanijy…

ITW SIGNODE INDIA LTD. vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

Appeal is allowed in part but

…and others (2003) 2 SCC 111, State of Karnataka Vs. Vishwabharathi House Building Coop. Soc. & Ors. (2003) 2 SCC 412, High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Vs. P.P. Singh and Anr 2003 (4) SCC 239 and Dipak Chandra Ruhidas Vs. Chandan Kumar Sarkar (2003) 7 SCC 66] Before us, the constitutionality of Section 11A as amended in the year 2000 has not been questioned. http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 20 of 22 Cotspun (supra) was decided when the matters relating to classification, approval thereof as also short-levy or upon detection of a mistake were governed by the…