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

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

23 money, incurred for their benefit, from the respondent Ex-Chief Ministers; the impugned Legislation is not an Appropriation Act; passing of an Appropriation Act is a pre-condition for expenditure to be incurred by the Executive; and it is not permissible for the Executive to first incur expenditure, and then for an Act to be passed ratifying such expenditure

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI MADAN MOHAN GUPTA

Bench: SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA,SANJEET PUROHIT

Section 148 notice. 3. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [“Tribunal”] ultimately bore in consideration the decision of the Court in Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2011 SCC OnLine Del 2612] to hold that the reassessment shall stand confined to items which had been mentioned or taken note of by the AO while forming the opinion that income

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENRAL vs. SHRI NIRMAL KUMAR KEDIA

In the result, the impugned orders of the

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR

REASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 22.01.2020 PASSED IN ADCOM/ZONE-II/APP-1/SMR/CR-27/2019-20 BY ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, GANDHINAGAR BENGALURU, ORDER, SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.05.2016 PASSED IN VAT.AP.NO.65/15-16 ON THE FILE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS)- 1, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE APPEAL FILED AGAINST ORDER DATED 10.06.2015 PASSED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, (ADUIT

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. PALSANA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED

Bench: INDERJEET SINGH,VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

23 2. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (APPEALS-4) 2ND FLOOR, TTMC 'B' BLOCK BMTC BUILDING, K.H.ROAD SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. …PETITIONERS (BY SHRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALGI, AGA) AND: M/s. W.S. RETAIL SERVICES PVT. LTD. NO.447 B, 1ST A CROSS KORAMANGALA BENGALURU-560 034. REPRESENTED BY MR. ANIL GUPTA -MANAGER ACCOUNTS …RESPONDENT (BY SHRI. P.B.HARISH, ADVOCATE) IN S.T.A

MAMTA GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires