Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.45 seconds)Section 2 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
Section 42 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 2013
Section 3 in The Companies Act, 2013 [Entire Act]
The Companies Act, 1956
Commissioner Of Income- Tax, Bombay vs Smt. Indira Balkrishna on 14 April, 1960
individuals with reference to a particular statute. For
example, when the said terms “association of persons”
or “body of individuals” occur in a section which
imposes a tax on income, the association must be one
the object of which is to produce income, profit or gain
(vide CIT v. Indira Balkrishna, Mohd. Noorulla v. CIT,
N.V. Shanmugam and Co. v. CIT and Meera and
Co. v. CIT). But the object need not always be to carry
on commercial or business activity. For example, when
the word “person” occurs in a statute relating to
agriculture or ceiling on landholding, the term
“association of persons/body of individuals” may refer
to a combination of individuals who join together to
acquire and own land as co-owners and carry on
agricultural operations as a joint enterprise.”
N. V. Shanmugham And Co vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras on 23 April, 1970
individuals with reference to a particular statute. For
example, when the said terms “association of persons”
or “body of individuals” occur in a section which
imposes a tax on income, the association must be one
the object of which is to produce income, profit or gain
(vide CIT v. Indira Balkrishna, Mohd. Noorulla v. CIT,
N.V. Shanmugam and Co. v. CIT and Meera and
Co. v. CIT). But the object need not always be to carry
on commercial or business activity. For example, when
the word “person” occurs in a statute relating to
agriculture or ceiling on landholding, the term
“association of persons/body of individuals” may refer
to a combination of individuals who join together to
acquire and own land as co-owners and carry on
agricultural operations as a joint enterprise.”
M/S. Meera Company,Ludhiana vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax,Punjab, ... on 11 March, 1997
individuals with reference to a particular statute. For
example, when the said terms “association of persons”
or “body of individuals” occur in a section which
imposes a tax on income, the association must be one
the object of which is to produce income, profit or gain
(vide CIT v. Indira Balkrishna, Mohd. Noorulla v. CIT,
N.V. Shanmugam and Co. v. CIT and Meera and
Co. v. CIT). But the object need not always be to carry
on commercial or business activity. For example, when
the word “person” occurs in a statute relating to
agriculture or ceiling on landholding, the term
“association of persons/body of individuals” may refer
to a combination of individuals who join together to
acquire and own land as co-owners and carry on
agricultural operations as a joint enterprise.”
S. Sundaram Pillai, Etc vs V.R. Pattabiraman Etc on 24 January, 1985
62. This Court in S. Sundaram Pillai and Others v. V.R.
Pattabiraman and Others55 has held that a proviso serves four
different purposes, as stated below: