Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Jayalakshmi Chits

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

211 of 2008 is filed against  the order passed in ITA No.672/AHD/1997 filed  by Smt. Sulochana V. Gupta. 7.For the sake of convenience, Tax Appeal No.  194 of 2008 is treated as a lead matter. 8.1. The assessee filed return of income for A.Y.  1992­93 on 30.07.1993 declaring total income  of   Rs.3,02,099/­.   During   the   course   of  assessment proceedings

The Commissioner of Income Tax - VI vs. M/s. Manikanta Iron AND Hardware

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

211 of 2008 is filed against  the order passed in ITA No.672/AHD/1997 filed  by Smt. Sulochana V. Gupta. 7.For the sake of convenience, Tax Appeal No.  194 of 2008 is treated as a lead matter. 8.1. The assessee filed return of income for A.Y.  1992­93 on 30.07.1993 declaring total income  of   Rs.3,02,099/­.   During   the   course   of  assessment proceedings

M/s. Canara Securities Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 178 of the Companies Act, 2013. Therefore, the Chairman of the company, HVL cannot arrogate unto himself the power to cause such appointment when such power ultimately rests with the Board of Directors. The observation of the two Joint APLs that the evident performance of BCrL, the flagship company of MP Birla Group is deteriorating ever since, HVL became

THE PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [CENTRAL] HYDERABAD vs. M/S SREE NAGENDRA CONSTRUCTIONS, KHAMMAM

In the result, appeal stands dismissed

Bench: This

gain on reinstatement of FDDBs made by the assessing authority by following its earlier order which has not reached finality and without considering the provisions of the Act? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in holding that the realized foreign exchange fluctuation is part of capital asset disregarding the revenue

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX vs. M/S V.SATAYANARAYANA

The appeal is allowed

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

211] and contended that whether a presumption arises from the common course of human affairs or from a statute there is no difference as to the manner in which that presumption could be rebutted. In the decision referred to above the Privy Council, when dealing with a case from Nigeria, held that if an explanation was given which the jury

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. Shri Raaj Kumar Jain

Section 27 begins with a proviso and states that when any fact is deposed to as discovered, in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, 49 whether it amounts to a confession