Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.54 seconds)The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Section 200A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Biswajit Das vs Union Of India & Ors. on 20 December, 2018
Similarly, the decision of the Hon'ble
Delhi High Court in case of Biswajit Das v/s UOI (supra) is on
constitutional validity of section 234E and not on the powers of the
Assessing officer to levy fee under section 234E prior to 01.06.2015 and
therefore, doesn't support the case of the Revenue.
Section 154 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Rajesh Kourani vs Union Of India & 4 on 20 June, 2017
Here, it is relevant to note that the Hon'ble
Kerala High Court has taken into consideration the earlier two decisions
of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in case of Shri Fatheraj Singhvi &
others (supra) as well as the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in
case of Rajesh Kourani vs UOI (supra) and held that there is cleavage of
judicial opinion and has followed the Karnataka High Court decision
stating that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court has not considered the
29
Bank of India
CBDT Circular No. 19 of 2015, issued in the context of amendment
brought in by the Finance Act 2015 in section 200A where at para 47.20,
it has been clearly emphasized that these amendments would take effect
from 01.06.2015.
Commr.Of Income Tax-I vs M/S Vatika Township Pvt.Ltd. on 29 October, 2014
18. We have also gone through the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in the case of CIT vs. Vatika Township Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein the
Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has discussed in great
detail the general principle of concerning retrospectively and held that of
the various rules guiding how a legislation has to be interpreted, one
established rule is that unless contrary intention appears, a legislation is
presumed not to have a retrospective operation.