PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. SHRI ASHOK AGARWAL HUF

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,REKHA BORANA

e) make a note or an inventory of such record or property; (f) examine on oath any person, who is found to be in possession or control of any record or property, in respect of all matters relevant for the purposes of any investigation under this Act: ***** (3) Before making a search, the authority, shall— (a) where a building

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT LTD

Bench: SANDEEP MEHTA,KULDEEP MATHUR

22 :: subsequent decisions of the High Court that the Finance Act, 1994, amended section 55(2) to provide that the cost of acquisition of, inter alia, a tenancy right. would be taken as nil. By this amendment, the judicial interpretation put on capital assets for the purposes of the provisions relating to capital gains was met. In other words

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S K.S. CAPITAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: AVNEESH JHINGAN,ASHUTOSH KUMAR

E R % 16.02.2024 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax by virtue of these two This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/12/2024 at 15:12:50 ITA 63/2024 & other connected

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. KAJAL CHHABRA

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SAMEER JAIN

22 September 2021:- "I. Whether the learned Tribunal did not err in holding that the provisions of Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not come into play in case of an exporter seeking rebate under Para 2 of Notification No. 41/2012-ST dated 29.6.2012? Digitally Signed By:PRAMOD KUMAR VATS Signing Date:26.09.2023 17:25:37 Signature

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

Bench: SANGEET LODHA,RAMESHWAR VYAS

68. AIR 1966 SC 1637 69. (1973) 1 SCR 515 70. (2013) SCC OnLine 622 (Bom HC DB) 71. (2003) ECR 783 (SC) 72. (2015) 4 SCC 400 73. AIR 1996 SC 188). 74. (1975) Supp SCC 1 75. AIR 1963 SC 1742 76. Criminal Appeal No. 75/69 decided on 10-9-1969 77. (1965) 2

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SKYWAYS INDUSTRIAL ESTATE COMPANY (P) LTD.

Bench: AKIL KURESHI,SUDESH BANSAL

22. It is noted that one of the important features of this affidavit is Annexure 1 which contains the indicative reference list of key words not to be allowed to individuals. The said list also contains names/marks of well known brands or companies which cannot be permitted to be registered as IDs of account holders without the permission

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI SANJAY CHHABRA

Bench: Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

E N T The plaintiff has filed the present suit, claiming damages amounting to Rs. 2,10,00,000/- for alleged defamation by his employer, asserting that the Signed By:PRIYA Signing Date:16.07.2025 15:18:52 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV Signature Not Verified 2 imputations made in the termination letter are contrary to the employment

MAMTA GUPTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA,SHUBHA MEHTA

2 (2010) 5 SCC 747 3 (2004) 10 SCC 627 4 2009 (8) SCC 582 Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:05.10.2025 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