Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 89 (3.12 seconds)The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 10 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Section 80HHC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in Finance Act, 1999 [Entire Act]
Garden Silk Mills Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India And Ors on 29 September, 1999
Further, the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Garden Silk Mills (supra) was not brought to the notice of the Court. Even no arguments were made regarding the scope of expression "any sum payable".
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Berger Paints (India) Ltd. (No. 2) on 13 February, 2002
5. That decision of Tribunal in the case of Amforge Industries (supra) is not more good law on account of subsequent judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Berger Paints (supra) and judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of C.L. Gupta (supra). The contention of the learned counsel for Revenue, that judgment of Allahabad High Court is distinguishable on the ground that Expln. 2 was not considered, was disputed by submitting that Expln. 2 was quoted in the judgment and, therefore, such contention of Revenue should not be accepted.
Section 13 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Trilochan Singh Gill vs Union Of India Anr. on 25 February, 1985
Similar observations have also been made by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Trilochan Singh v. Union of India (supra) in para 8 as under: