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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

price, and requesting them to place an order with the foreign headquarters were not auxiliary or preparatory in nature. The observations and findings of the High Court are eerily similar to the facts of this case: “Relying on these provisions, it is contended by the assessee that the liaison office was opened to act as a communication channel between

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. Smt. Raj Kumari

Accordingly are partly allowed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

234. In the circumstances, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal. 26. If the Tribunal is performing purely judicial functions, if it has trappings of a court, then in our opinion, the decision of the State Government to abolish it and entrust its powers with the Divisional Commissioner, who is an executive officer is clearly violative of the principle of separation