Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.35 seconds)Section 45 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 54 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Sri Sambandam Udaykumar on 15 February, 2012
The relevant extract
from the decision of Hon'ble Karnatka High Court in the case of Mr
Sambandam Udaykumar (supra) are reproduced hereunder:
Section 139 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Smt K G Rukminiamma on 27 August, 2010
The CIT(A) held that the reliance of the
assessee in the case of CIT v. Smt. K.G. Rukuminiamma 196 Taxman 87 (Kar)
would also not come to his rescue as in that case the assessee had four
residential units, but all of them were in the same building acquired in
pursuance of a development agreement.
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Late Khoobchand M Makhija on 18 December, 2013
iii) CIT v. Late Khoobchand M Makhija (Hon'ble High Court of
Karnatka in ITA No. 496 of 2007)
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shri Sardarmal Kothari on 17 June, 2008
In fact, Madras High Court had an occasion to consider this aspect in the case
of CIT v. Sardarmal Kothari [2008] 302 ITR 286 where it has been held as under: