Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.62 seconds)
Documents citing M/S. Hanu Motel Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs U.P. Financial Corpn. Ltd. & Anr on 24 October, 2008

Hanu Motel Pvt. Ltd. And Another vs Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation ... on 18 September, 2015

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court, thereafter, decided Civil Appeal Nos. 6280-6281 of 2008 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 10554-55 of 2003 titled as M/S Hanu Motel Pvt. Ltd & Anr vs. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation Ltd. & Anr on 24.10.2008. It is admitted to learned counsel for the parties that nothing has been said by Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment dated 24.10.2008 regarding payment of court fees.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - U C Dhyani - Full Document

Asst Cit 18(2), Mumbai vs Laxmi Finance & Leasing Companies ... on 7 September, 2021

Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed ; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words". It has even been said that "if the provision is so wanting in clarity that no meaning is reasonably clear, the courts will be unable to regard it as of any effect
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 42 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mr Francis Lfred Misquita, Panaji vs Income Tax Officer, Intl. Taxation ... on 15 April, 2024

692. The intention of the legislation must be found in the words used by the Legislature itself. The question is not what may be supposed and has been intended but what has been said - Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Panji Cites 48 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Deputy Commissioner Ofincome Tax ... vs Laxmi Finance And Leasing Company ... on 29 August, 2024

- Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed ; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Laxmi Finance And Leasing Companies ... vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 29 August, 2024

- Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed ; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Laxmi Finance And Leasing Company ... vs Deputy Commissioner Ofincome Tax ... on 29 August, 2024

- Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed ; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Laxmi Finance And Leasing Companies ... on 29 August, 2024

- Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P.) Ltd. v. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corpn. [2003] 113 Comp. Cas. 374 (SC). The court must look squarely at the words of the statute and interpret them. It must interpret a taxing statute in the light of what is clearly expressed. It cannot imply anything which is not expressed ; it cannot import provisions in the statute so as to supply any assumed deficiency. The object of this rule is to prevent a taxing statute being construed "according to its intent, though not according to its words".
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jagnnath Patra vs Managing Director U.P.Financial ... on 5 September, 2017

To that extent, the High Court's conclusions quoted above were correct. Where the High Court went wrong is by holding that the proceedings under the U.P. Act were permissible. The U.P. Act deals with separate modes of recovery and such proceedings are not relatable to proceedings under the Financial Act. Accordingly, in view of definite law laid down by their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme in the judgment, cited hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned Annexure No.1 dated 09.07.2012 and Annexure No.2 dated 09.09.2012 are quashed and set-aside.
Uttarakhand High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - R Sharma - Full Document
1