Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 19 (0.34 seconds)The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Section 10 in The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 [Entire Act]
Anupama Ashok Kulkarni, Pune vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 12(1), Pune on 30 May, 2023
―8. We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the
material on record. The facts are not in dispute. Admittedly, the assessee was a
salaried employed of Pfizer Healthcare India Private Limited, Aurangabad during
the AY 2020-21 and was covered by the Financial Scheme 2019 of the company
for employees at Aurangabad. We have perused the order of the Tribunal in the
case of Ashok Raghunathrao Kulkarni (supra) wherein the Tribunal has set aside
the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and directed the Ld. AO to delete the impugned
addition.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Ajit Kumar Bose on 6 January, 1986
26. We further find the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of
CIT vs. Ajit Kumar Bose (supra) has observed as under:
Ito, Wd-12(4), Kolkata, Kolkata vs M/S Shee Sen Leather Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata on 17 January, 2018
27. We find the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs.
Avirook Sen (supra) at para 12 of the order has observed as under: