Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (0.29 seconds)

Rishikesh Balkishandas And Others vs I. D. Manchanda, Income-Tax Officer, ... on 12 September, 1986

This decision of the Full Bench was followed by a Division Bench of the same High court arising under the provisions of the Income-tax Act in Rishikesh Balkishandas v. I. D. Manchanda, ITO (1987) 167 ITR 49. This Full Bench decision applies to the provisions involved in the instant appeals on all fours and, accordingly, it is to be held that a company can be sentenced to fine only, though the provisions in the Income-tax Act contemplate a sentence of imprisonment and fine.
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 17 - Full Document

Pnb Finance & Industries Ltd. And Others vs Miss Gita Kripalani, Income-Tax ... on 1 August, 1984

20. The other decision referred to by Mr. Dasaratharama Reddy is that of the Delhi High Court in PNB Finance and Industries Ltd. v. Gita Kripalani, ITO . Though the decision of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court is referred to in this decision of a single judge, the case was not decided in the background of the present issue and, therefore, that decision is of no help.
Delhi High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 23 - Full Document

General Sales P. Ltd. And Others vs Gopal Mukherjee, Income-Tax Officer, ... on 29 August, 1986

21. Another decision of the Delhi High Court relied upon is the one in General Sales P. Ltd. v. Gopal Mukherjee, ITO . There, a petition under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, was filed for quashing the order whereby the petitioners in that case were summoned in a criminal complaint. The argument there was that, for want of mens rea and also in view of the minimum imprisonment prescribed by section 276C(1) of the Income-tax Act, the company cannot be held guilty. The learned judge having referred to the decision of the Full Bench of that High Court and also to the later decision in PNB Finance and Industries Ltd. , wherein the view taken was that the Full Bench decision needed reconsideration, disposed of the petition. No decision, as such, independently is rendered on the question involved in the present appeals.
Delhi High Court Cites 24 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Kusum Products Ltd. vs S.K. Sinha, Ito on 19 August, 1980

23. Mr. Dasaratharama Reddy took me through a number of other decisions such as Kusum Products Ltd. v. S. K. Sinha, ITO , Modi Industries Ltd. v. B. C. Goel , S. M. Badsha v. ITO (1987) 168 ITR 332 (Ker) and Vijaya Commercial Credit Ltd. v. Sixth ITO . These are all decisions relating to offences that took place earlier to October 1, 1975, i.e., before the amendment of section 277 and incorporation 278B. At that point of time, the sentence prescribed was only imprisonment and imposition of fine was not contemplated by section 277 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment of this court in Crl.
Calcutta High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 21 - Full Document

Modi Industries Ltd. vs B.C. Goel on 25 February, 1981

23. Mr. Dasaratharama Reddy took me through a number of other decisions such as Kusum Products Ltd. v. S. K. Sinha, ITO , Modi Industries Ltd. v. B. C. Goel , S. M. Badsha v. ITO (1987) 168 ITR 332 (Ker) and Vijaya Commercial Credit Ltd. v. Sixth ITO . These are all decisions relating to offences that took place earlier to October 1, 1975, i.e., before the amendment of section 277 and incorporation 278B. At that point of time, the sentence prescribed was only imprisonment and imposition of fine was not contemplated by section 277 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment of this court in Crl.
Allahabad High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 19 - Full Document

S.M. Badsha vs Income-Tax Officer on 4 December, 1986

23. Mr. Dasaratharama Reddy took me through a number of other decisions such as Kusum Products Ltd. v. S. K. Sinha, ITO , Modi Industries Ltd. v. B. C. Goel , S. M. Badsha v. ITO (1987) 168 ITR 332 (Ker) and Vijaya Commercial Credit Ltd. v. Sixth ITO . These are all decisions relating to offences that took place earlier to October 1, 1975, i.e., before the amendment of section 277 and incorporation 278B. At that point of time, the sentence prescribed was only imprisonment and imposition of fine was not contemplated by section 277 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment of this court in Crl.
Kerala High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 10 - K T Thomas - Full Document
1   2 3 Next