Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 31 (0.27 seconds)Section 3 in Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 30 in Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 [Entire Act]
Article 318 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Bhagat Ram Sharma vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 November, 1987
In Bhagat Ram Sharma Vs. Union of India and Others [1988
(Supp) SCC 30], the Bench states,
Shyam Sunder And Others vs Ram Kumar And Another on 31 July, 2001
In Shyam Sunder and Others Vs. Ram Kumar and Another [(2001)
8 SCC 24], a Three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court states thus:-
Commr.Of Income Tax-I,New Delhi vs Vatika Township P.Ltd on 15 September, 2014
The learned Judge took
note of the judgments of the Supreme Court in Vatika Township Private
Limited (supra), Keshavlal Jethalal Shah V. Mohanlal Bhagwandas & Another
(1968 AIR 1336) and Sebi V. Alliance Finstoc Ltd.((2015) 16 SCC 731) as
well as the doctrine of fairness in coming to the conclusion that Act 27 of
2011 would have retrospective application. In conclusion, he set aside the
impugned order and remanded the matter to the file of the respondent to
pass orders afresh after hearing the petitioner.
http://www.judis.nic.in
22/24
WP.Nos. 9996 of 2012, 17314 of 2015
3666 of 2012 & 21237 of 2011
Govind Das And Ors. vs The Income Tax Officer And Anr. on 18 December, 1975
35. We would also like to reproduce hereunder the following
observations made by this Court in the case of Govind Das v. ITO,
while holding Section 171(6) of the Income- Tax Act to be prospective
and inapplicable for any assessment year prior to 1st April, 1962, the
date on which the Income Tax Act came into force:
Zile Singh vs State Of Haryana & Ors on 7 October, 2004
In Zile Singh Vs. State of Haryana and Others [(2004) 8 SCC 1], a
three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court states authoritatively as follows:-