Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) of the section. Such an order, instruction or direction cannot override the provisions of the Act; that would be destructive of all the known principles of law as the same view would really amount to giving power to a delegated authority to even amend the provisions of law enacted by Parliament. Such a contention cannot seriously be even raised

The Commissioner of Income Tax -1 vs. Harmahendar Singh Bagga

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) of the section. Such an order, instruction or direction cannot override the provisions of the Act; that would be destructive of all the known principles of law as the same view would really amount to giving power to a delegated authority to even amend the provisions of law enacted by Parliament. Such a contention cannot seriously be even raised

Commissioner of Income TAx-II, Hyderabad vs. M/s. Sri Balaji Bio MAss Power Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) of the section. Such an order, instruction or direction cannot override the provisions of the Act; that would be destructive of all the known principles of law as the same view would really amount to giving power to a delegated authority to even amend the provisions of law enacted by Parliament. Such a contention cannot seriously be even raised

Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. The Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

2) of the section. Such an order, instruction or direction cannot override the provisions of the Act; that would be destructive of all the known principles of law as the same view would really amount to giving power to a delegated authority to even amend the provisions of law enacted by Parliament. Such a contention cannot seriously be even raised

M/s.V.R.Farms Pvt Ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

TDS 4,26,357 4,26,357 Less Advance Tax -- -- 24,19,743 18,71,668 Add: Interest u/s 234B 2,31,376 1,64,666 Add: Interest u/s 234C 1,52,748 1,18,149 Tax + interest payable 28,03,867 21,54,483 Less: MAT credit 5,48,075 -- Total Tax + interest liability

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX III, vs. M/S. SAVIJANA SEA FOODS PVT. LTD.,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

47. The resultant position as far as AYs 1995-96 and 1997-98 are concerned ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 23 of 36 is that the Revenue has accepted the finding of the ITAT as affirmed by this Court. 48. For AY 1996-97, the ITAT decided the issue following its decision for AY 1997-98 which, as already noticed

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Kokivenkateswara Reddy AND others,

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

47. The resultant position as far as AYs 1995-96 and 1997-98 are concerned ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 23 of 36 is that the Revenue has accepted the finding of the ITAT as affirmed by this Court. 48. For AY 1996-97, the ITAT decided the issue following its decision for AY 1997-98 which, as already noticed

Late Smt. Hoorjahan Begum vs. Tghe Income Tax Officer

Appeal stands disposed off

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,S.RAVI KUMAR

Section 192(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has deducted the tax at source from the employee's salary. In case if an objection is raised by any party, the objector is required to prove by producing evidence such as LPC to suggest that the employer failed to deduct the TDS from the salary of the employee. However, there

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s.OCV Reinforcement Manufacturing Limited

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

47 years, Occ: Driver, R/o.Sarapaka (V), Bhargampahad ltrlandal Khammam District. ITC Limited, paper Boards & Sepciality Papers Divis, ITC Bhadrachalam House, 106, Sardar Parel Road Somajiguda, Hyderabad. ... Respondents/Res ponde nts 2 3 4 5 6 7 'ts t! l.A. NO: 'l OF 20 CRPMP. NO: 339 OF 2015 Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Shri Chidipotu Sridhar,

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as follows;

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,SURESH KUMAR KAIT

V ^-eSPATCVV^^ DECREE MAGMA No.203 of 2016 lx: *3' N3' ALLOWING THE MAGMA APHC010631512016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. HARI HARANADHA SARMA MOTOR ACCIDENT CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.203 of 2016 Appeal filed under Section 173 of M.V. Act, aggrieved