The commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s Lanco Kondapalli Power (P) Ltd

House, Nhava Sheva. 5. Commissioner of Customs, Office of the Commissioner of Customs (NS-1), Jawaharlal Nehru Customs House, Nhava Sheva. …Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2091 OF 2022 Balkrishna Industries Ltd, Page 108 of 198 22nd March 2024 Saurer Textile Solutions Pvt Ltd v The State of Maharashtra & Ors & Connected Writ Petitions 1-2-oswp-1494-2023-J+.docx

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

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

9]. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION The main point for consideration is whether AMCs constituted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 4 of the AMC Act are institutions established for advancement of the object of general public utility and, therefore, exist for charitable purpose. All other questions are incidental to the main question and are adverted to at the appropriate

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

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

9]. POINT FOR CONSIDERATION The main point for consideration is whether AMCs constituted by the Government of Andhra Pradesh under Section 4 of the AMC Act are institutions established for advancement of the object of general public utility and, therefore, exist for charitable purpose. All other questions are incidental to the main question and are adverted to at the appropriate

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

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

v. Coman (1920) 7 TC 517, the subject which is hired out is a complex one and the return received by the assessee is not the income derived from the exercise of property rights only but is derived from carrying on an adventure or concern in the nature of trade.” The provisions of sections 9 and 10 of the Indian

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

v) in sub Section (1). An argument was raised that Section 132 may cause harassment in personal liberty to an innocent person who may possess any material without knowing that it is concealed income. This argument was repelled by Court. It held that the object is to get concealed income. Any person who is in custody without enquiring about

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

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

v) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term finance for the construction or purchase of houses in India for residential purposes; and (iii) in respect of the specified entity referred to in sub-clause (vi) of clause (a), the business of providing long-term finance for development of infrastructure facility in India; (c) "banking company" means a company

THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. L. SURYAKANTHAM, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

v. Justice S. R. Tendolkar AIR 1958 SC 538). 113. The petitioners have also challenged the notifications on the ground that it violates article 301 as well as articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution. However, in the entire petitions, the petitioners have neither alleged nor given any figures to demonstrate and establish that they suffered loss in the business

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. M/S NMDC LIMITED

In the result, this Appeal Suit is partly allowed by modifying the

Bench: The Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court Reserved On : 19.03.2024 Delivered On : 18.06.2024 Coram The Hon'Ble Mrs.Justice L.Victoria Gowri A.S.(Md)No.110 Of 2015 1.S.Govindasamy 2.S.Rajaraman 3.S.Kalaiselvan ... Appellants

Section 8 of Indian Succession Act, 1956. Thus, categorically contending that the judgment of the learned Trial Court need to be modified with respect to the property in item No.1 of the plaint schedule property and 11th item, that is the temple property and all the other reliefs as granted by the learned Trial Court is absolutely valid

ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,. HYDERABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, HYDERABAD

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 13 confers overriding effect on the Special Court Act. It says that provisions of the Special Court Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act or in any decree or order

ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 13 confers overriding effect on the Special Court Act. It says that provisions of the Special Court Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act or in any decree or order

ANDHRA BANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD, HYDERABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, HYDERABAD

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 13 confers overriding effect on the Special Court Act. It says that provisions of the Special Court Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act or in any decree or order

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