Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 59 (1.08 seconds)
Union Of India & Anr vs M/S Nitdip Text. Processors (P)Ltd.& ... on 3 November, 2011 cites

Khandige Sham Bhat And Others vs The Agricultural Income Tax Officer on 29 August, 1962

In Khandige Sham Bhat vs. Agricultural Income Tax Officer, Kasaragod and 52 Anr. (AIR 1963 SC 591). Travancore Cochin Agricultural Income Tax Act was extended to Malabar area on November 01, 1956 after formation of the State of Kerala. Prior to that date, there was no agricultural income tax in that area. The challenge under Article 14 was that the income of the petitioner was from areca nut and pepper crops, which were harvested after November in every year while persons who grew certain other crops could harvest before November and thus escape the liability to pay tax. It was held that, that was only accidental and did not amount to violation of Article14. In Jain Bros.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 156 - Full Document

Regional Director Employees A State ... vs Ramanuja Match Industrirs on 27 November, 1984

"53. Although the Act is a beneficial one and, thus, deserves liberal construction with a view to implementing the legislative intent but it is trite that where such beneficial legislation has a scheme 14 of its own and there is no vagueness or doubt therein, the court would not travel beyond the same and extend the scope of the statute on the pretext of extending the statutory benefit to those who are not covered thereby. (See Regional Director, ESI Corpn. v. Ramanuja Match Industries)"
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 136 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Union Of India (Uoi) vs Charak Pharmaceuticals (India) Ltd. on 26 March, 2003

vs. Union of India (supra), Section 297(2)(g) of Income Tax Act, 1961 was challenged because under that Section proceedings completed prior to April, 1962 was to be dealt under the old Act and proceedings completed after the said date had to be dealt with under the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the purpose of imposition of penalty. April 01, 1962 was the date of commencement of Income Tax Act, 1961. It was held that the crucial date for imposition of Penalty was the date of completion of assessment or the formation of satisfaction of authority that such act had been committed. It was also held that for the application and implementation of the new Act, it was necessary to fix a date 53 and provide for continuation of pending proceedings. It was also held that the mere possibility that some officer might intentionally delay the disposal of a case could hardly be a ground for striking down the provision as discriminatory.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next