Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)Institute Of Chartered Accountants vs L.K. Ratna & Others on 21 October, 1986
"The learned counsel, in support of his arguments that the defect is not curable has placed reliance on the decision of this court in Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. L K. Ratna . It was, no doubt, laid down in this case that a post-decisional hearing cannot be an effective substitute of pre-decisional hearing and that if an opportunity of hearing is not given before a decision is taken at the initial stage, it would result in serious prejudice, inasmuch as if such an opportunity is provided at the appellate stage, the person is deprived of his right of appeal to another body."
The United Planters Associationof ... vs K.G. Sangameswaran & Anr on 6 March, 1997
In the case of United Planters Association of Southern India v. K. G. Sangameswaran , their Lordships have observed as under (page 463) :
Vijay Kumar Bhati vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Another on 21 May, 1993
In the case of Vijay Kumar Bhati v. CIT [1994] 205 ITR 110, the Delhi High Court observed at page 120 as under :
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Rajasthan Mercantile Co. Ltd., India ... on 21 September, 1994
14. The prior intimation of the proposed action is the requirement of observing principles of natural justice. Any such set off without any prior intimation or opportunity is not only illegal but void and non est in the eye of law and the respondent-company is entitled to challenge the same, as, any void action is non est in the eye of law. Such illegal setting off of the amount refundable against the outstanding demand is, therefore, to be ignored. Against the decision of the Delhi High Court, a S. L. P. was'filed in the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has dismissed the S. L. P. which is reported in CIT v. Vijay Kumar Bhati [1993] 203 ITR (St.) 1.
State Bank Of Patiala, Patiala vs The Commissioner Of ... on 15 March, 1996
The same view has been taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in State Bank of Patiala v. CIT[1999] 239 ITR 421.
R.B. Shreeram Durga Prasad & ... vs Settlement Commission (It & Wt) & Anr on 27 January, 1989
In the case of R. B, Shreeram Durga Prasad and Fatechand Nursing Das v. Settlement Commission (IT and WT) the issue before their Lordships that the order passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The order is a nullity. At page 175, their Lordships have observed as under :
Government Of India And Another vs Maxim A. Lobo And Another on 20 April, 1990
19. From the observations referred to above it is clear that before any order under Section 245 of the Act the opportunity of being heard should be given to the assessee. Without notice/intimation to the assessee before adjustment the order under Section 245 is nullity.