Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.26 seconds)Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957
Ladhuram Taparia vs B. K. Bagchi. on 26 February, 1951
(8) In another case Laduram Taparia v. B. K. Bagchi, 1951-20 ITR 61 (Cal) Bose, J. Construed the expression " may in his discretion" in Section 45 of the Income-tax Act and held in the circumstances of that case that there was a duty on the respondent to refrain from enforcing payment of tax under the notice of demand and to grand extension of time till the appeal is disposed of by the appellate authority.
Vetcha Sreeramamurthy vs The Income-Tax Officer Vizianagaram, ... on 3 April, 1956
In Vetcha Sreeramamurthy v. Income Tax Officer, AIR 1957 Andh-Pra 114 Subba Rao, C. J. , (as he then was) while construing the said expression observed as follows:-
Section 19 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 23 in The Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 45 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 45 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
E. Krishnappa Naicker vs The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer And ... on 28 September, 1962
A similar point had arisen in connection with Section 31(5) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act in Krishnappa Naicker v Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Thiruvannamalai (1963) 14 STC 162 (Mad) Supra, which sub-section was to the following effect:-