ARECANUT PROCESSING AND SALE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, these petitions are allowed

Bench: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ram Mohan Reddy

condone the delay in cases relating to carry forward of 4 losses, disposed of the petition permitting the petitioner to approach

DR(SMT) SUJATHA RAMESH vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

carried out. I wish to submit at this stage a request for a one time extension of time for the purchase of bonds, which will save a substantial amount in tax for me. This will be a big amount for a middle class person like me. It will not be out of place to bring this to your kind notice

COMMISSIONER OF vs. MOOKAMBIKA TEMPLE

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

carry forward and set off of loss and not excess expenditure or deficit? 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in holding that assessee is entitled to claim depreciation on capital assets when it amounts to double deduction as the income of the assessee is already exempt and amended

M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

carry on the business of banking by Reserve Bank of India under Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The assessee filed the return of income under Section 143(1) of the Act for the Assessment Year 2007-08 on 31.10.2007 and declared total income of Rs.40,77,27,150/-. However, no order of assessment was passed under Section

KHALEEL AHMED K R vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.VEERAPPA,K.NATARAJAN

carry out the moderation/random review in respect of the 4 papers i.e., (Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Science - I and II and Geology - I and II). Again one more application was filed as per I.A.5 seeking some clarification regarding the method of scaling and it was also clarified. 22. Aggrieved by the said order of the High Court, the unsuccessful candidates