Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.25 seconds)Section 38 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 19 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 49 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Section 17 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 50 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
Section 16 in The Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Entire Act]
C.I.T. Andhra Pradesh vs M/S Taj Mahal Hotel, Secunderabad on 12 August, 1971
In The Commissioner of Income-tax, Andhra Pradesh v. Taj Mahal Hotel (supra), cited by Mr. Bhargava, the interpretation of the word 'plant' in Section 10(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was considered by the Supreme Court. Section 10(5) provided inter-alia that in Sub-section (2) of Section 10 'plant' includes vehicles, books, scientific apparatus and surgical equipment purchased for the purpose of the business, profession or vocation. In this case, therefore, the definition of 'plant' was not exhaustive but inclusive. The definition did not say what the word 'plant' means and what it includes. In the present case, on the other hand, as we find, the definition of 'town development scheme' in Section 2(u) of the Adhiniyam is exhaustive inasmuch as the definition not only says what it means but also says what it includes.