Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.56 seconds)
Documents citing Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Bhanwara Ram Nayak S/O Shera Ram Nayak on 17 December, 2019

Commissioner vs Cornerstone on 15 May, 2008

42. Here also various statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements cited before us were not cited before the High Court. The High Court, therefore, did not have the benefit of examining such judicial pronouncements. Even otherwise we have given detailed reasons for holding the belief that we have expressed in this judgment. We are unable to persuade ourselves to follow Delhi High court in above mentioned cases of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nanak Ram Jaisinghania (supra) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-II vs. Manglam Ricinus Ltd. (supra).
Gujarat High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - A Kureshi - Full Document

Commissioner vs Cornerstone on 15 May, 2008

42. Here also various statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements cited before us were not cited before the High Court. The High Court, therefore, did not have the benefit of examining such judicial pronouncements. Even otherwise we have given detailed reasons for holding the belief that we have expressed in this judgment. We are unable to persuade ourselves to follow Delhi High court in above mentioned cases of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nanak Ram Jaisinghania (supra) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-II vs. Manglam Ricinus Ltd. (supra).
Gujarat High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - A Kureshi - Full Document

Commissioner vs Sambhav on 15 May, 2008

42. Here also various statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements cited before us were not cited before the High Court. The High Court, therefore, did not have the benefit of examining such judicial pronouncements. Even otherwise we have given detailed reasons for holding the belief that we have expressed in this judgment. We are unable to persuade ourselves to follow Delhi High court in above mentioned cases of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nanak Ram Jaisinghania (supra) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-II vs. Manglam Ricinus Ltd. (supra).
Gujarat High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - A Kureshi - Full Document

Commissioner vs Priyanka on 30 January, 2009

42. Here also various statutory provisions and judicial pronouncements cited before us were not cited before the High Court. The High Court, therefore, did not have the benefit of examining such judicial pronouncements. Even otherwise we have given detailed reasons for holding the belief that we have expressed in this judgment. We are unable to persuade ourselves to follow Delhi High court in above mentioned cases of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Nanak Ram Jaisinghania (supra) and in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax, Delhi-II vs. Manglam Ricinus Ltd. (supra).
Gujarat High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A Kureshi - Full Document
1