Suchirindia Infratech Pvt. Ltd vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-Tax

Accordingly, the learned appellate authority has rightly dismissed the

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

price. 27. In that view of the matter, as it is admitted case of the petitioner that the electricity generated in 540 MW Power Plant is used in the course of or furtherance of his business, which is evident from Form G provided by the taxpayer i.e. the petitioner herein, the petitioner would not be entitled for ITC to electrical

Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Agricultural Market Committee,

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

Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 or any other bank being a bank included in Second Schedule to Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and the like. The breach of Section 11(5) would attract Section 13(1)(d) of the IT Act and the benefit under Sections 11 and 12 would not be available if funds are deposited or invested

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

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

Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1980 or any other bank being a bank included in Second Schedule to Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and the like. The breach of Section 11(5) would attract Section 13(1)(d) of the IT Act and the benefit under Sections 11 and 12 would not be available if funds are deposited or invested

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Sri Lakshmi Narasimha Construction

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

D) by LRs & Others v. Sayed Ismail & Another, reported in (2012)8 SCC 516, 2. Anthony v. Kc Ittoop and Sons, reported in (2000)6 SCC 394, 3. The National Textile Corporation Ltd. v. Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 7448 of 2011) decided by Supreme Court on 05.09.2011. 4. Iswarbhai C. Patel v. Harihar Behera, reported

The Commissioner of Income Tax-V vs. The Armed Forces Officers Co.Op Housing Society Ltd

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

5 of 43 (i) Receipt-cum-Agreement to Sell dated 25.9.2006 executed by the defendant nos.1, 3 and 4 as Ex.P-1 (admitted document) (ii) Receipt-cum-Agreement to Sell dated 25.9.2006 executed by the defendant no.2 as Ex.P-2 (admitted document) (iii) Zonal Development Plan issued by the DDA with respect to the land situated in village Goela Khurd as Ex.PW5/1

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

price paid or promised or part- paid and part-promised. Sale how made.—Such transfer, in the case of tangible immoveable property of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards, or in the case of a reversion or other intangible thing, can be made only by a registered instrument. 1In the case of tangible immoveable property of a 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

M/S VAIBHAV vs. JOINT COMM. OF INCOME TAX RANGE 3 HYD

Appeal is allowed and the judgments and decrees passed by the

Bench: The Learned Trial Court) Was Allowed & The Judgment & Decree Dated 12.12.2000, Passed By Learned Senior Sub Judge, Kullu Was Set-Aside. (Parties Shall Hereinafter Be Referred To In

17. It is now well settled that payment of the entire price is not a condition precedent for completion of the sale by passing of title, as Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (“the Act”, for short) defines “sale” as “a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part-paid and part

The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central) vs. Madhu Enterprises

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

d) In clause (iii) of sub-section-4, a proviso shall be added in the following manner:- Provided that the Input Tax Credit on purchases when sold in course of inter State trade or commerce shall be allowed only to the extent of the Central Sales Tax payable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ( 74 of 1956). The aforesaid

S.l. Shiva Raj vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

d) In clause (iii) of sub-section-4, a proviso shall be added in the following manner:- Provided that the Input Tax Credit on purchases when sold in course of inter State trade or commerce shall be allowed only to the extent of the Central Sales Tax payable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 ( 74 of 1956). The aforesaid

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

price  lower than the market rate. If that be so,  the   question   of   inflating   the   loss   by  transferring   the   shares   to   group   company  would   not   arise.   Under   ordinary  circumstances,   it   is   always   open   to   the  assessee in his own wisdom to either hold on  to certain bunch of shares or to sell the  same to avoid further loss

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, vs. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Pvt. Ltd.,

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

price  lower than the market rate. If that be so,  the   question   of   inflating   the   loss   by  transferring   the   shares   to   group   company  would   not   arise.   Under   ordinary  circumstances,   it   is   always   open   to   the  assessee in his own wisdom to either hold on  to certain bunch of shares or to sell the  same to avoid further loss

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

price  lower than the market rate. If that be so,  the   question   of   inflating   the   loss   by  transferring   the   shares   to   group   company  would   not   arise.   Under   ordinary  circumstances,   it   is   always   open   to   the  assessee in his own wisdom to either hold on  to certain bunch of shares or to sell the  same to avoid further loss

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. New Bombay Goods Transport

5) of section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (Act no.74 of 1956), the Governor is pleased to direct that with effect from the date of publication of this notification in the official Gazette, the tax payable under sub-section (1) of the said section by any dealer having his place of business in the State of Uttaranchal

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

17 of 85 24. It is urged by the appellants that in any case, the expatriates and employees of GEIIPL neither had the authority, whether expressed or implied to conclude contracts in India nor was such authority exercised habitually in India. It is urged that the expatriates and employees of GEIIPL participated in negotiations for conclusion of contracts but that

Commissioner of Income tax-VI vs. M/s. Narpat Girji Constructions,

The appeal is allowed

D K SINGH) 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant- the Official Liquidator of the Mysore Kirloskar Ltd., (the Company in liquidation) being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 21.07.2015 passed by the learned Company Court in Company Application No.826/2011 in Company Petition No.166/2001. 2. The Company Application No.826/2011 was filed by the appellant herein seeking

M/s. Maruthi Movies vs. Income Tax Officer

Bench: This Court & Making The Same A Rule Of Court, Alongwith Decree Against Respondents Awarding Rs.5,35,920/- Paid By The Petitioner To The Arbitrator As Their Share Of Fees As Per Order Dated 21.12.2010. 2. Respondent No.1 Has Filed Its Objections To The Award Under Section 30 & 33 Of The Act In Form Of I.A. No.9067/2011. Respondent No.2 Has Also Filed Its Objections To The Award.

d) of sub-section (1), the court may enforce specific performance in the following cases: xxxxxx (c) where the suit is for the enforcement of a contract for the construction of any building or the execution of any other work on land: PROVIDED that the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:- (i) the building or other work is described

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. The Andhra Bank Employees Co.Operative Bank Limited

In the result, for the above reasons, these appeals fail and

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

D deals with deductions in respect of certain incomes. Section 80P is a special provision providing for the deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies. As defined in Section 2(19) of the Act, “co-operative society” means “a co-operative society registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, or under any other law for the time