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

The Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. M/s. Bhagiradha Chemicals AND Industries Ltd.,

The appeal is disposed of

Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” 3. The present appeal by the appellant-assessee relates to the Assessment Year 2007-08. The appellant-assessee had filed return declaring income of Rs.1,82,68,953/- under normal provisions and book- profit of Rs.9,85

M/S NMDC LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

68 of 2016 so far, the annulment of marriage between the parties under Section 12(1) (C) is concerned, is hereby affirmed. 71. Now coming to the issue of permanent alimony which is the subject matter in the F.A.No. 213 of 2019. It has been contended by the appellant/ wife that the permanent alimony as determined by the learned

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

85 (MSAS). Accordingly, the civil appeal filed by the Department stands partly allowed.” (at pages 15-16) 18. It has already been seen that none of the customers of the assessees are located in India or have received any services in India. This being the case, it is clear that the very first ingredient contained in Article

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

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

85 of 300 BCrL and/or its assets or properties as alleged. It is submitted that similar submissions were made by HVL before the Joint APLs which is evidenced by the Minutes of the meeting dated 21st July, 2017, similar stand was taken in his affidavit-in-opposition to the administrator's proceedings filed by the respondents in 2008 which culminated

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S I SPACE GLOBAL SERVICES [INDIA] PVT LTD., HYDERABAD

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 85 of the Bihar Re-organization Act by adopting the decision of the - 67 - erstwhile State of Bihar dated 11.01.1991, therefore, there is no dispute about the fact that once the State of Jharkhand has adopted the decision of the erstwhile State of Bihar as contained in order dated 11.01.1991 by virtue of departmental letter no. 6063 dated

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI M.SURYA NARAYANA RAJU

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 85 of the Bihar Re-organization Act by adopting the decision of the - 67 - erstwhile State of Bihar dated 11.01.1991, therefore, there is no dispute about the fact that once the State of Jharkhand has adopted the decision of the erstwhile State of Bihar as contained in order dated 11.01.1991 by virtue of departmental letter no. 6063 dated

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), HYD vs. M/S GOMATI AGRO FARMS PVT LTD., HYD

Appeal stands disposed of

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

Section 85 of the Bihar Re-organization Act by adopting the decision of the - 67 - erstwhile State of Bihar dated 11.01.1991, therefore, there is no dispute about the fact that once the State of Jharkhand has adopted the decision of the erstwhile State of Bihar as contained in order dated 11.01.1991 by virtue of departmental letter no. 6063 dated

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. K. V. Srinivasa Rao

Appeal stands disposed of

Section 85 of the Bihar Re-organization Act by adopting the decision of the - 67 - erstwhile State of Bihar dated 11.01.1991, therefore, there is no dispute about the fact that once the State of Jharkhand has adopted the decision of the erstwhile State of Bihar as contained in order dated 11.01.1991 by virtue of departmental letter no. 6063 dated

Commissioner of Income Tax - III vs. M/s. Kolan Engineering Constructions Private Limited

Appeals are disposed of with the aforesaid modification in the

Sections 279, 338, 304A of the I.P.C. The deceased Sunita Mawandia was aged about 39 years while Rajendra Mawandia was aged about 44 years at the time of their death. Both were running cloth business and were income tax payee. Sunita Mawandia used to earn Rs. 9,763/- per month while Rajendra Mawandia used to earn

Commissioner of Income Tax-III, vs. M/s Kolan Engineering Constructions Private Limited,

Appeals are disposed of with the aforesaid modification in the

Sections 279, 338, 304A of the I.P.C. The deceased Sunita Mawandia was aged about 39 years while Rajendra Mawandia was aged about 44 years at the time of their death. Both were running cloth business and were income tax payee. Sunita Mawandia used to earn Rs. 9,763/- per month while Rajendra Mawandia used to earn

The Commissioner of Income -Tax - III, vs. Shri Taher Ali

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 / 79 CRA-322-08gr any letter to defendant no.1 or her husband or DW 1 Mangaldas about the same. He denied that there was no agreement of leave and licence of 1968. In the agreement of 1968, Rs.2000 was shown as deposit amount. He paid that amount by cash. He, however, does not have document to show that

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

68. Submission is that the prompt report of the incident by the accused persons naming the assailants therein, who are prosecution witnesses herein and the injury reports of the accused appellants proved by the doctor examined as P.W-4, in addition to the defence taken by them under Section 313 Cr.P.C is sufficient proof of the plea of the accused

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 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. 518 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 895/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE CMC CONGREGATION, PALA

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 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. 518 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 895/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE CMC CONGREGATION, PALA

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Smt G Sailaja

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 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. 518 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 895/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE CMC CONGREGATION, PALA

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 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. 518 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 895/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE CMC CONGREGATION, PALA

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

68 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. 518 OF 2015 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 895/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/PETITIONER: THE PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE CMC CONGREGATION, PALA