COMMNR. OF CENTRAL EXCISE, VADODARA-I vs. M/S. GUJARAT CARBON & INDUSTRIES LTD

117 of the Finance Act, 2000 notwithstanding anything contained in any judgment, decree or order of any court, tribunal or other authority , sub-clause (xii) and sub-clause (xvii) of clause (d) of sub-rule (1) of Rule 2 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as they stood immediately before the commencement of the Service Tax (Amendment) 3 Rules

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,SIMLA vs. M/S GREEN WORLD CORPORATION

Appeals are disposed of with the aforementioned directions

117 of the Act provides for appointment of Income-tax authorities. Control of Income-tax authorities is specified in Section 118 in the following terms: “118. The Board may, by notification in the Official Gazette, direct that any income-tax authority or authorities specified in the notification shall be subordinate to such other income-tax authority or authorities

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(CENTRAL) vs. M/S. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG.(WVG.)CO.LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

Reassessment by the I.T.O. disallowing the assessee’s claim for depreciation on roads and drains to the extent of Rs. 15,50,526. On appeal the C.I.T. (Appeals) allowed the assessee’s claim for depreciation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue. At the instance of the revenue on a reference under Section 256(1) the High Court answered

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LAXMAN DAS KHANDELWAL

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

117/- out of Rs.29,53,52,631/- holding that the correct approach would be to apply the peak formula to determine in such transaction which comes to Rs.29,54,514/- as on 05.03.2010. Aggrieved, Revenue filed an appeal. The Assessee filed cross objection on the ground of jurisdiction of Assessment Officer regarding non issue of notice under Section

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY vs. . VS RANCHHODDAS KARSONDAS, BOMBAY

117 after the assessee had filed a voluntary return was valid in law? (2) Whether the assessment made on 26-2-1951 is valid in law? This reference was heard by the High Court on March 18, 1954, and by a judgment delivered on the same day, Chagla, C.J., and Tendolkar, J., answered’ both the questions in the negative. Before

MAHARAJ KUMAR KAMAL SINGH vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BIHAR & ORISSA

In the result we hold that the Patna High Court was right in coming

reassess such income, profits or gains or recompute the loss or depreciation allowance, and the provisions of this Act shall, so far as may be, apply accordingly as if the notice were a notice issued under that sub-section ". It is clear that two conditions must be satisfied before the Income-tax Officer can act under