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

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

58 (Cal). 15. Lastly, it was argued that hardship or inequity is no ground for not charging interest under sections 234B and 234C before allowing MAT credit. It was contended that it is a well established principle that equity has no place in tax laws. It was therefore urged that the questions be answered in favour of the revenue

Commissioner of Income Tax [TDS] vs. Sri VAraha Laxmi Nrusimha Swamy DEvastanam

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Swapna Lahari Pvt Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 22ND ASHADHA, 1943 WA NO. 511 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 552/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE SUPERIOR GENERAL ST.JOSEPH'S CONREGATION, S.H.MOUNT P.O., KOTTAYAM

M/s Modi Builders AND Realtors (P) Ltd., vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income tax,

The appeals are disposed of

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

58,084/- from 1st April, 1995 upto the date of refund/payment. Rs.3,57,302/- from 1st April, 1997 upto the date of refund/payment and Rs.96,258/- from 1st June, 1999 upto the date of refund/payment. Interest, it is claimed, is payable under Section 244A of the Act. 4. The contention of the Revenue is that this would amount to paying

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Vishwas Investments Pvt.Ltd,

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

Section 40(a) (ia) of the Act. Further issue may also arise whether the payees had made payments of the TDS to the credit of the government or not. The Tribunal would, therefore, decide the case on merits in view of the law laid down by us in P.M.S. Diesels Vs Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Jalandhar’s case (supra

The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, vs. M/s. Prasad Film Laboratories Ltd.,

Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenges the award dated 19th December, 2011 passed by the Learned Sole Arbitrator. 2. The Petitioner – Food Corporation of India (hereinafter, ‘FCI’) and M/s Shankar Rice and General Mills (hereinafter ‘miller’) had entered into two milling agreements dated 8th November, 1994 and 15th November, 1994. Under the said contracts, the miller

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s Polisetty Somasundaram,

58,86,441/-. As such interest of Rs.19,06,373/- worked out @12% on interest free advances was disallowed. (7) The assessee had debited expenses on account of charity and donation of Rs.66,203/- and gift expenses of Rs.42,530/-, totaling to Rs.1,08,733/-, which were disallowed being not admissible as per provisions