Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Section Wise 2003 2003 (4) This

Law	-- All -- GST Income Tax Benami Property Customs Corporate Laws Securities / SEBI Insolvency & Bankruptcy FEMA PMLA Service Tax Central Excise CST, VAT & Sales Tax Wealth tax Indian Laws
Court	-- Any -- Supreme Court SC Orders / Highlights High Court Appellate Tribunal Tribunal Appellate authority for Advance Ruling Advance Ruling Authority National Financial Reporting Authority Competition Commission of India ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY Commission Central Government Board DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court Commissioner / Appellate Authority Other
Citation	--Year-- 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 1987 1986 1985 1984 1983 1982 1981 1980 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 1971 1970 1969 1968 1967 1966 1965 1964 1963 1962 1961 1960 1959 1958 1957 1956 1955 1954 1953 1952 1951 1950 Upto 1949 - -Volume- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 -
Landmark	Nil - N/A Referred in >= 3 Cases Referred in >= 4 Cases Referred in >= 5 Cases Referred in >= 10 Cases Referred in >= 15 Cases Referred in >= 25 Cases Referred in >= 50 Cases Referred in >= 100 Cases
Order by	TMI Citation Date of Decision

Advanced Search Options

Case Laws

Showing 481 to 486 of 486 Records

• 2003 (4) TMI 6 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
  

  Imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) - whether in the present case a substantial question of law arises for calling for a statement of case from the Tribunal - It is not disputed before us that the assessee did not file any explanation when the penalty proceeding was initiated. Held that calling for the statement of case in the present case is not warranted inasmuch as the Tribunal has rightly recorded that the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) in the case at hand was just and proper – Assessee’s appeal dismissed

  ---

• 2003 (4) TMI 5 - DELHI HIGH COURT
  

  Gift Tax Act, 1958 - Retirement of Partner - "When a partner retires from a partnership, the partnership continues. The assets and the goodwill of the firm continue to remain the assets and the goodwill of the firm. All that the retiring partner gets is the value of his share in the partnership assets less its liabilities. It cannot, in such circumstances, be held, assuming that the retiring partner received less than what was his due, that the difference was something that he had transferred to the continuing partners within the meaning of 'transfer' of property for the purposes of the Gift-tax Act or that there was a gift liable to gift-tax."

  ---

• 2003 (4) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Held that cinema theatre as a "plant" is not entitled to depreciation and extra shift allowance as applicable to a "plant"

  ---

• 2003 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether Tribunal was right in holding that the interest on deposits with Tamil Nadu Electricity Board should be treated as income derived by the industrial under taking for the purpose of section 80HH - HC was justified in answering the question in favour of department

  ---

• 2003 (4) TMI 2 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
  

  Tribunal was right in allowing deduction u/s 32A in respect of the computers installed in the office premises - Tribunal was right in law in allowing the travelling expenses incurred on the staff members of the head office on their visit to the branch office of the assessee in India - Tribunal was not right in law in allowing maintenance expenses incurred by the assessee on the flat owned by it and provided to its employees

  ---

• 2003 (4) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT
  

  Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the probable estate duty payable on the death of the life tenant has to be taken into account and the value of the property will be diminished by that for charge of wealth- tax in the hands of the remaindermen - High Court answered the question in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee - order of HC is correct

  ---

1 ....2122232425