Mohamad Kavi Mahamad Amin v. Fatmabai Ibrahim

6 SCC 71Reported decision1997#18104 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing Mohamad Kavi Mahamad Amin v. Fatmabai Ibrahim

M/S Scorpion Security Ltd vs. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner -II

In the result, the petition is disposed of

WP/6270/2020HC Karnataka02 Feb 2022

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.I.ARUN

Section 14BSection 7Q

…ot to levy such 7 penalty / damages by taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on decisions of Supreme Court in 'MOHAMAD KAVI MOHAMAD AMIN VS. FATMA BAI IBAHIM', (1997) 6 SCC 71, 'M/S HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD. VS. STATE OF ORISSA', 1969 (2) SCC 627, and decisions of this court in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. A.ALBUQUERQUE AND SONS', MANU/KA/0278/1991 (DB), 'THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER VS. JAMIYYATUL FALAH AND ORS.', MANU/KA//0744/2009, 'THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER VS. KAYTEE…

Win Cable & Datacom P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT (TDS) 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are hereby allowed

ITA 3635/MUM/2016[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Apr 2018AY 2001-02

Bench: S/Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Amarjit Singh (Jm) I.T.A. No. 3635/Mum/2016(Assessment Year 2001-02)

Section 191Section 194CSection 201Section 201(1)

…ategorically held that the statutory power should be exercised within a reasonable time even if no time limit is prescribed. The same opinion has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohamad Kavi Mahamad Amin Vs. Fatmabai Ibrahim [(1997) 6 SCC 71]. In view of the foregoing discussion we are of the considered opinion that there is no merit in the contention of the learned D.R. that in the absence of time limit specified u/s 201, action can be taken at any point of time. It is naturally so for the reason that time is the core of every action under law. If the legislature is silent in prescribi…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-4 vs. Ge Money Financial Services Pvt. Ltd

ITA/224/2017HC Delhi10 Apr 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 10A(2)(c)

…W.P.(C) 224/2017 Page 1 of 118 + W.P.(C) 224/2017 & CM APPLs. 1032/2017 & 46950/2022 ARCELORMITTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. ..... Petitioners versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents INDEX Sl. No. Contents Paragraph Nos. 1 Introduction 1 - 2 2 Factual Matrix 3 - 3.36 3 Submissions on behalf of the Petitioner 4 – 4.28 4 Submissions on behalf of Respondent no. 1 & 2 – Union of India 5-5.16 5 Submissions on b…

Hathway C-Net P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Tax Recovery (TDS) 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 4261/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 201Section 201(1)

…ategorically held that the statutory power should be exercised within a reasonable time even if no time limit is prescribed. The same opinion has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohamad Kavi Mahamad Amin Vs. Fatmabai Ibrahim [(1997) 6 SCC 71]. In view of the foregoing discussion we are of the considered opinion that there is no merit in the contention of the learned D.R. that in the absence of time limit specified u/s 201, action can be taken at any point of time. It is naturally so for the reason that time is the core of every action under law. If the legislature is silent in prescribi…

Hathway Cable & Datacom Ltd, Mumbai vs. TRO (TDS) RG 1, Mumbai

The appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 3512/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Taneja

Section 201Section 201(1)

…ategorically held that the statutory power should be exercised within a reasonable time even if no time limit is prescribed. The same opinion has been expressed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohamad Kavi Mahamad Amin Vs. Fatmabai Ibrahim [(1997) 6 SCC 71]. In view of the foregoing discussion we are of the considered opinion that there is no merit in the contention of the learned D.R. that in the absence of time limit specified u/s 201, action can be taken at any point of time. It is naturally so for the reason that time is the core of every action under law. If the legislature is silent in prescribi…