Shri Bakul Oil Industries v. State of Gujarat

1 SCC 31Reported decision1982#18523 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2002 to 2023.

Judgments citing Shri Bakul Oil Industries v. State of Gujarat

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2486/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…of such disclosure in the affidavit, which was filed along with the petition, raises a prima facie impression that the writ petition was based on unreliable facts. 20. In case of M/s Sukhwinder Pal Bipan Kumar and others v. State of Punjab and others, [(1982) 1 SCC 31], Page No. 46 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd. a three Judge Bench of this Court in dealing with petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution held that under Order XIX Rule 3 of the Code it was incumbent upon the deponent to disclose the nature and source of his knowledge with sufficient parti…

DCIT CC 3(4) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2485/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…of such disclosure in the affidavit, which was filed along with the petition, raises a prima facie impression that the writ petition was based on unreliable facts. 20. In case of M/s Sukhwinder Pal Bipan Kumar and others v. State of Punjab and others, [(1982) 1 SCC 31], Page No. 46 ITA NO. 2485 & 2486/MUM/2017 C.O. NO. 265 & 355/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd. a three Judge Bench of this Court in dealing with petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution held that under Order XIX Rule 3 of the Code it was incumbent upon the deponent to disclose the nature and source of his knowledge with sufficient parti…

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Hycons Infrastructure (India) Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/411/2013HC Telangana25 Sept 2013
Section 3Section 3(3)Section 5ASection 5A(1)

…which is contrary to the terms of the Industrial Policy. T he State cannot issue notifications contrary to the Industrial Policy in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Suprabhat Steel Ltd. and others -vs- State of Bihar and others, reported in (1999) 1 SCC 31. (b) The State having held out a solemn promise to the investors to invest in the North-eastern region, declared concessions. Reposing faith in the promise, the investors have invested substantial sums of money in the North-eastern region. T he abrupt withdrawal of concessions by the modified notifications, in question, is impermissible in view o…

Commnr. of Central Excise, Shillong vs. M/S. North Eastern Tobacco Ltd

C.A. No.-000200-000201 - 2002Supreme Court28 Nov 2002
For Respondent: NORTH-EASTERN TOBACCO CO. LTD
Section 5A

…http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 200-201 of 2002 PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE. SHILLONG RESPONDENT: NORTH-EASTERN TOBACCO CO. LTD. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28/11/2002 BENCH: M.B. SHAH & D.M. DHARMADHIKARI JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 2002 Supp(4) SCR 373 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by: DHARMADHIKARI, J. These appeals have been preferred by the Commissioner of Central Excise. Shillong representing the Department of Central Excise to assail separate orders passed in appeals by the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Kolkata [hereinafter re…

Shri Bakul Oil Industries v. State of Gujarat (1 SCC 31) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax