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

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

x) Even if the provisions of Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC many not be attracted for protecting interest of the parties in the pending administration suit but the Court can appropriately deal with the situation wherever it relates to protection and preservation of the estate of the deceased in the pending proceedings. Thus, the Court held that

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

The appeal is allowed

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

x. Following the complaint, PW-7 was assigned to investigate the matter. On the 18.3.1997 at 8:30 am, PW-2 arrived at the C.B.I. office and was accompanied by PW-5, an independent witness. PW-7 then disclosed the purpose of their gathering and reviewed the contents of the complaint filed by PW-2. Subsequently, PW-2 produced three

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

Appeals are allowed

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

X 30cm above 15 cm from the ground is removed with the bark shaver, leaving 2 mm thick live bark which will facilitate easy and smooth freshening of the blaze. The surface should be very smooth and should look reddish in colour. Step 2. 30 Mark of blaze frame and central groove:- The blaze frame is vertically fixed

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68, Sri.Joy deposed that his income was too high than shown in the income tax returns and the income shown in the returns was not correct. In the argument notes titled “the business of Sri.Joy and benefit of purchase”, in paragraph 19, it is stated that all the real estate transactions of Sri.Joy are not brought on record, to maintain

The Commissioner of Income-Tax - VI, vs. Shri Mekala Bal Reddy

x 2 cm on right leg. Opinion:- Both injuries were caused by blunt object. Injuries were fresh. Injury no.2 was simple and kept under observation.” 28. The injury report was proved as Exhibit Kha-'1' by P.W-4 being in his handwriting and signature. 16 29. With regard to other injured, on the accused side, P.W-4 stated that he had examined

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

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

X - Statement of accused recorded by CBI as containing 258 pages. xi) SET - XI - Containing statements of witnesses by CBI having 125 pages. 28 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters xii)SET - XII - Containing a report sent by DDIT, Unit - I to DI about appraisal of some of the documents containing 18 pages. 26. Aforesaid letter dated

C. SANYASI RAJU vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIZAG.

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

X - Statement of accused recorded by CBI as containing 258 pages. xi) SET - XI - Containing statements of witnesses by CBI having 125 pages. 28 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters xii)SET - XII - Containing a report sent by DDIT, Unit - I to DI about appraisal of some of the documents containing 18 pages. 26. Aforesaid letter dated

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

X - Statement of accused recorded by CBI as containing 258 pages. xi) SET - XI - Containing statements of witnesses by CBI having 125 pages. 28 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters xii)SET - XII - Containing a report sent by DDIT, Unit - I to DI about appraisal of some of the documents containing 18 pages. 26. Aforesaid letter dated

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited,(Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,

X - Statement of accused recorded by CBI as containing 258 pages. xi) SET - XI - Containing statements of witnesses by CBI having 125 pages. 28 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters xii)SET - XII - Containing a report sent by DDIT, Unit - I to DI about appraisal of some of the documents containing 18 pages. 26. Aforesaid letter dated

The Pr. Commissioner of Income tax (Central), vs. Sri Vaishnavi Educational Society,

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Aravind Kumar W.P. No.51929/2014 C/W W.P.Nos.42063/2012, 30494/2013, 42671/2013, 638/2014, 797/2014, 1089/2014, 3211/2014, 3389/2014, 6180/2014, 10356/2014, 12014/2014, 12015/2014, 13043/2014, 13045/2014, 13206/2014, 13207/2014, 13398/2014, 13774/2014, 14149/2014, 14161/2014, 14494/2014, 14502/2014, 14521/2014, 14689/2014, 16646/2014, 17051/2014, 17594/2014, 19729/2014, 21158/2014, 23897/2014, 28861/2014, 30731/2014, 31723/2014, 33774/2014, 33777/2014, 34084/2014, 34259/2014, 34272/2014, 34391/2014, 35204/2014, 35243/2014, 35247/2014, 35305/2014, 35609/2014, 36164/2014, 36166/2014, 36489/2014, 36525/2014, 36971/2014, 37446/2014, 38055/2014, 38463/2014, 38471/2014, 38472/2014, 38661/2014, 38753/2014, 39383/2014, 39633/2014, 39832/2014, 40204/2014, 40379/2014, 41394/2014, 41422/2014, 41427/2014, 41428/2014, 41858/2014, 43815/2014, 43963/2014, 44306/2014, 44527/2014, 44742/2014, 44835/2014, 45486/2014, 46766/2014, 47103/2014, 47105/2014, 47106/2014, 47107/2014, 47608/2014, 47731/2014, 47821/2014, 47860/2014, 47913/2014, 48577/2014, 48880/2014, 49567/2014, 50260/2014, 50533/2014, 51294/2014, 51930/2014, 51931/2014, 51932/2014, 52760/2014, 53854/2014, 54059/2014, 54083/2014, 54236/2014

SECTION 24(2) OF RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT 2013. IN W.P.NO.797/2014: BETWEEN: SRI.N.RAMAIAH S/O. LATE NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/A NO.708, HEANNUR MAIN ROAD, KAVERI SERVICE STATION, KALYAN NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 043. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. G. PAPI REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VIKASA

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sri Chirla Rama Reddy, Contract

Appeal is dismissed with costs

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice N.K.Sudhindrarao R.S.A.No.70/2007

x 40,000/- = Rs.89,50,000/- and an advance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- was paid and however, at the time of execution of Ex.P1 the full amount of Rs.79,50,000/- was made. Thus the plaintiff-Company in tandum has complied with all the formalities and procedure and the promises. It was 1st defendant who did not stick

Commissioner of Income Tax-i, vs. Agricultural Market Committee

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Sreenivas Harish Kumar

56 years, R/o 169, Nobel Residency, 2nd Cross, SOS Post, Bannergatta Road, Bengaluru-76. …Appellant (By Sri R.Nagendra Naik, Advocate) AND: State by CBI/ACB, Ganganagar, Bellary Road, Bengaluru. …Respondent (By Sri Madhav Kashyap, Advocate for Sri P.Prasanna Kumar, Advocate) This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment and conviction dated

PR COMMR OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. K RAVINDER REDDY, HYDERABAD

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

x. Vivek Venkatachalam - He did his B. Tech in Chemical Engineering. His designation is 'Executive - Business Operations'. He is an employee of GEIIPL. 28.17. Taking above discussion into consideration, more specifically, the primary, specific and original substantiated material in the form of survey documents, self appraisals and Manager assessment etc., there remains no doubt whatsoever that GE Overseas was selling

The Commissioner of Income TAx-IV, vs. M/s. Mahaveer Enterprises (India) Limited

The Appeal is dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

X of the Contract Act. By reason of a deed of power of attorney, an agent is formally appointed to act for the principal in one transaction or a series of transactions or to manage the affairs of the principal generally conferring necessary authority upon another person. A deed of power of attorney is executed by the principal in favour

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

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), vs. M/s Country Club Inda Limited

Section 1. Assignment and Assumption. Assignor hereby assigns to the Assignee all the rights, entitlements, covenants and obligations of the Assignor under the Equipment Contract to sell, supply and deliver the Equipment to the Purchaser under the Equipment Contract and the Assignee hereby assumes, and agrees with all of the parties hereto, to perform, observe and be bound

Gutta Venkata Rama Devi vs. The Income Tax Officer

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

56 of 171 Through: Mr. R.B. Singh, Mr. Rajan Sharma Mr. Depak Gola and Mr. Shivansh, Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR .Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Ms. K.K. Kiran Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Mr. M.S. Akhtar and Mr. Divakar Kapil, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Sanjay Podar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mrinalini Sen, Standing Counsel