Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.89 seconds)
Commissioner Of Income Tax 5 Mumbai vs M/S. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. Through ... on 31 January, 2018 cites

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd vs Dy.Commr.Of I.T.Mumbai & Anr on 8 May, 2017

Against the aforesaid judgment of the Bombay High court dated 12.08.2010 an appeal was filed in this court which has been decided by vide  its judgment reported in  Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai & Anr. (2017) 7 SCC 421. This Court, while deciding the above appeal repelled the challenge raised by the assessee regarding vires  of Section 14A. In para 36 of the judgment, this Court noticed   that   with   regard   to   retrospectivity   of   provisions Revenue had filed appeal, hence the said question was not gone into   the   aforesaid   appeal.   In   the   above   case,   this   Court specifically   left   the   question   of   retrospectivity   to   be decided in other appeals filed by the Revenue. We thus have proceeded to decide the question of retrospectivity of Rule 8D in these appeals.
Supreme Court of India Cites 39 - Cited by 43 - R Gogoi - Full Document

Keshavlal Jethalal Shah vs Mohanlal Bhagwandas & Anr on 2 April, 1968

24, paras 33­35) “33.   A   Constitution   Bench   of   this   Court in  Keshavlal   Jethalal   Shah  v.  Mohanlal Bhagwandas, while considering the nature of   amendment   to   Section   29(2)   of   the Bombay   Rents,   Hotel   and   Lodging   House Rates   Control   Act   as   amended   by   Gujarat Act 18 of 1965, observed as follows: (AIR p. 1339, para 8) ‘8.   …   The   amending   clause   does   not seek   to   explain   any   pre­existing legislation   which   was   ambiguous   or defective.   The   power   of   the   High Court   to   entertain   a   petition   for exercising   revisional   jurisdiction was   before   the   amendment   derived from   Section   115   of   the   Code   of Civil Procedure, and the legislature has   by   the   amending   Act   not attempted  to  explain  the  meaning  of that   provision.   An   explanatory   Act is   generally   passed   to   supply   an obvious   omission   or   to   clear   up 22 doubts   as   to   the   meaning   of   the previous Act.’
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 95 - J C Shah - Full Document
1   2 3 Next