DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS)

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

reassessment of such property taxes was made, and the amount of tax to be levied and collected was determined under sub-section (1). The proviso thereto required the Corporation to pay simple interest, at the rate of six percent per annum, on the amount of excess liable to be refunded under Sub-section (2), from the date of the decree

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ANKIT CHIRAG DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.

The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above, leaving

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,MADAN GOPAL VYAS

11 of 17 (Tax Case No.8/2024) (c) The said articles must not be recorded in the books of accounts, if any maintained; (d) The assessee is unable to offer an explanation regarding the nature and the source of acquiring the articles in question; or The explanation, which is offered, is found to be, in the opinion of the Officer

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. SHRINATH CORPORATION

Bench: PANKAJ BHANDARI,PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

Section 153(1) prescribes the limitation period for passing an order of assessment. The maximum time limit, as applicable during the relevant period, was two years from the end of the assessment year. Similarly, - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30667-DB WA No. 68 of 2024 in cases where assessment, reassessment

MAMTA GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA

11:29:12 Signature Not Verified LA.APP. 59/2007 & connected Page 88 of 171 18.4 Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the market value for the acquired land of village, Kilokari cannot be treated differently from the adjacent land of posh colonies such as Maharani Bagh, Kalindi Colony, Siddhartha Nagar Extension, Sunlight Colony, Jiwan Nagar, Desu Colony, Jangpura and Rajdoot

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI SURENDRA MEENA

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,PRAVEER BHATNAGAR

reassessment proceedings for AY 2015-16, which were commenced by issuance of the notice dated 28.06.2021 under Section 148 of the Act. 2. The Assessee is a national political party and is registered with the Election Commission of India [ECI] by a certificate dated 10.01.2000. The Assessee filed its return of income on 29.02.2016, declaring a Nil income, after claiming

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JODHPUR vs. GAJ SINGH

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

Section 306 of the Indian Evidence Act (sic Indian Succession Act) is based cannot have an applicability in all actions even in an case of personal injuries where damages flows from the head or under the head of loss to the estate. Therefore, even after the death of the injured claimant, claim petition does not abate and right

M/S S B L PRIVATE LIMITED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 72 JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: INDRAJIT MAHANTY,SATISH KUMAR SHARMA

11 “2.1.2.1. Plan The plan of the Central Bus Terminal Complex shall be prepared by Kannur Municipality. The concessionaire shall be free to change the interior design to enhance the project viability with the approval of Kannur Municipality. The proposed site for the Central Bus Terminal Complex is located at Thavakkara, Kannur. The Municipality is having land to the extend

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I vs. SHRI ARVIND GOTEWAL S/O SHREERAM GOTEWAL

The appeals are allowed

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ravi Malimath

1. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRLCE, C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU–560 001. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), C.R. BUILDING, QUEENS ROAD, BENGALURU–560 001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. ARAVIND, ADVOCATE) 4 AND: M/S. GMR ENERGY LIMITED, 25/1, SKIP HOUSE, MUSEUM ROAD, BENGALURU–560 025. PAN:AAACT8420A. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. BALARAM