Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur. vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Kangiri.

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

c). In all the three sub-sections the words used are “income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable purposes”. Under Section 11(4) the expression “property held under trust” includes a business undertaking so held. In other words, income from business undertaking held for charitable purposes can fall under Section 11 subject to such income fulfilling

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

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

c). In all the three sub-sections the words used are “income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable purposes”. Under Section 11(4) the expression “property held under trust” includes a business undertaking so held. In other words, income from business undertaking held for charitable purposes can fall under Section 11 subject to such income fulfilling

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Nara Constructions,

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY

property and to contract and by that name, sue and be sued. The object with which the National Housing Bank (herein after referred to as NHB/ Bank for short] was established is to provide long term finance for construction and/or purchase of residential housing or residential township-cum-housing development or slum clearance projects. The entire capital

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. M/s. Murala Venkateswara Rao AND others

Appeal is dismissed,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

properties M.Os.1 to 7. During the cross-examination of P.W1, Exs.DI and 7. D2, through P.W5, Exs.D3 and D4, through P.W6, Exs.DS and D6 and through P.W8, Exs.D7 and D8 were marked. After closure of the prosecution side evidence, the accused officer was examined under Section 313 CrPC to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/s Padmapriya Real Estates AND Financiers

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment passed by

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

c) of the PC Act. Someone has to prove the correctness of the entries made in such a list. 20. In order to sustain an offence, under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act, 188, three essential conditions are required to be satisfied. Firstly, the prosecution has the burden to prove that the value

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S GOLDEN STAR FACILITIES AND SERVICES PVT LTD., HYD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 13 which provides for Rule making power of the Central Government in respect of minerals. Section 13 subsection (1) WP(C). 11249/2010 & other contd cases. -:88:- and Section 13 Sub-section (2) in so far as relevant in the present case are as follows: “13. Power of Central Government to make Rules in respect of minerals.-- (1) The Central

Commissioenr of Income Tax vs. Dr. T. Ravi Kumar

house, etc. In the case of CIT vs. Jai Bharat Maruti Ltd. (2007) 212 CTR (Del>)250, the High Court has held that recording of satisfaction by AO is sine quo non for the purpose of initiating penalty under Section 271(1) (c). From the reading of the assessment order it is not clear that whether the AO was satisfied

COMM.OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE vs. NAVABHARAT ENTERPRISES HYD

In the result, Income Tax Appeal No

Bench: This Court & Hence Both Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Decided By This Common Judgment. 2. Sri Ravi Kant, Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Rahul Agarwal, Advocate Have Appeared On Behalf Of Assessee & Sri Manish Goel, Advocate Has Put In Appearance On Behalf Of Revenue. 3. Revenue'S Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law:- (1)Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Tribunal Was Right In Holding That Authorization For Search

13. Reminder notice dated 29.7.1997 under Section 142(1) was served upon Assessee requiring it to file return by 8.8.1997. In response thereto, Assessee filed statement that most record of Assessee are lying with Central Excise Department, hence it is not in a position to file return of Income Tax. Thereafter, Income Tax Authorities contacted Excise Authorities and made efforts

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s Pokarna Limited

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

C.—Income from house property. - - 20 D.—Profits and gains of business or profession. E.—Capital gains. F.—Income from other sources. 10. Section 22 of the Act deals with income from House property which reads as under: Income from house property. 22. The annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto of which the assessee

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [TDS] HYDERABAD vs. M/S GHMC ,HYDERABAD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

13,14 & 15 Augusta Point, Sector-53, Golf Link Road, Gurgaon, Haryana – The property is in the name of ex-directors of the company. (B) Aquarius Business Park, Sector-74, Gurgaon, Haryana – License was granted by Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana for setting up a Cyber Park. The property was alloted in the name of Aquarius Buildcon

The Commissioner of Income Tax - I vs. M/s. BBL Foods (Earlier Amber Biscuits P Ltd.)

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

13(2) of PC Act, and Sections 420, 468 and 471 of IPC. The allegation against him was that, Sri.Joy, who Mat.Appeal No.242 of 2012 & conn. cases 15 was a real estate broker, hatched a criminal conspiracy with A1, Bank Manager of Union Bank of India, Cherpu branch, A13 Sri.K.T Thomas, a Chartered Accountant,and A14 Sri.G. Jyothi

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD vs. SMT.M.VIJAYA, HYDERABAD

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), HYDERABAD vs. SRI V.CHENNA KESAVA RAO

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S CONEXANT SYSTEMS INDIA PVT.LTD., HYD

Bench: SUREPALLI NANDA,UJJAL BHUYAN

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

THE PRL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HYD vs. M/S. AMR INDIA LTD., HYD

Bench: SUREPALLI NANDA,UJJAL BHUYAN

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S. CONEXANT SYSTEMS INDIA PVT.LTD., HYD

Bench: SUREPALLI NANDA,UJJAL BHUYAN

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-1, HYDERABAD vs. AP STATE AGRO INDUSTRIES DEVP CORP LTD, HYDERABAD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TIRUPATHI vs. M/S. DIVYA TRANSPORT, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT.

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Property Mgmt Office Basement, Grand Central Mall, Nana Mauva Main [2025:RJ-JP:25721] (34 of 55) [COAP-21/2016] 2. 3. 4. Road, Rajnagar Cross Road, Rajkot, Gujrat. Ved Prakash Arya s/o Satyapal Arya, Flat No. 701, Gladioli Chs, Off yari Roadversova, andheri, West Mumbai 400058 Jateen madan lal Gupta s/o roop Narayan gupta, 1, Rivera-30 Bunglows