Register free! 
SC Cases - Judgement
[ 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | 2013 ]  

 
First | Prev | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | Next | Last
Documents Found: 6595   
Title Forum  Year
DCIT vs E-Merck India Ltd. [LexDoc Id : 354184]
ITAT (Mumbai) 2008
Nirmal Singh Kahlon and J.P. Singla and Ors. vs State of Punjab and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 353817]
SC 2008
Sudheer Singh @ Sudheer vs State of Andhra Pradesh [LexDoc Id : 353816]
SC 2008
Ramachami vs State [LexDoc Id : 353814]
SC 2008
Govardhan Dass Bansal vs State [LexDoc Id : 353806]
SC 2008
Chet Ram vs Jit Singh

Harnek Singh vs Jaswant Singh
[LexDoc Id : 353805]
SC 2008
Sahiti and Ors. vs N.T.R. University of Health Sciences and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 352568]
SC 2008
Mohd. Yunus Khan vs U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd. and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 352559]
SC 2008
Poonam Industries vs CIT Condonation of delay-Reasonable cause: illness of partner-AY 2000-01. There was a delay of five months in filing appeal before the CIT(A). It was explained that it occurred due to illness of partner. The dela [LexDoc Id : 351682]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2008
Rikhabsao Nathusao Jain vs Corpn. of the City of Nagpur and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 350970]
SC 2008
Shantilal J. Sheth vs Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 349604]
HC (Bombay) 2008
DIT vs KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Income from international air traffic-Rental income-AY 1996-97 and AY 1997-98. The assessee was an airline of Netherlands. It entered into an agreement with a company in India for handling cargo in Indi [LexDoc Id : 349132]
HC (Delhi) 2008
Hindustan Unilever Ltd. vs D.A. Sheldekar [LexDoc Id : 349053]
HC (Bombay) 2008
CC vs B. Arun Kumar and Co. Refund-Refund pending disposal of a reference application-Assessee claimed a refund before the Commissioner which was rejected. On appeal before the tribunal, it passed order granting the refund with interest [LexDoc Id : 348804]
SC 2008
Arjun Singh, Bal Kishan and Sonu Kumar vs State of Himachal Pradesh [LexDoc Id : 348672]
SC 2008
Dropadabai vs State of Maharashtra [LexDoc Id : 348663]
HC (Bombay) 2008
Rock Hard Petrochemical Industries Ltd. vs ACCT and Ors. [LexDoc Id : 404724]
HC (Madhya Pradesh) 2008
CIT and Anr. vs United Insurance Co. Ltd. TDS-Interest payable under Motor Vehicles Act-Liability of insurance co.-AY 2003-2004. The insurance company was liable to make TDS under s.194A on interest payable under Motor Vehicles Act for delayed compensation. For not [LexDoc Id : 392756]
HC (Karnataka) 2008
CIT vs Kovai Medical Centre and Hospitals Ltd. Rate of depreciation-Hospital vs Welfare centre-AY 1991-92, AY 1992-93 and AY 1994-95. The assessee was running a hospital. The hospital could not be described as a "welfare hospital" as reffered to [LexDoc Id : 365602]
HC (Chennai) 2008
CIT vs Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. TDS: Interest paid on compensation to victims of motor accident-Refund of TDS-AY 2000-01. The assessee was an insurance company. It failed to make TDS on payment of interest on compensation to victims of motor accidents. It was [LexDoc Id : 363019]
HC (Karnataka) 2008
CIT vs International Amusement Ltd. Business expenditure-Advice on breakdown of machinery etc.-AY 2001-02 and AY 2002-03. The assessee was conducting rides in an amusement park. The payment made for advice on predictive breakdowns and maintenanc [LexDoc Id : 360599]
HC (Delhi) 2008
CIT vs Jagson International Ltd. Validity of: Re-assessment-No new information-AY.1998-99. The original assessment was made on 25 May 2000. The notice under s.148 was issued on the basis of a letter dated 28 Aug 1999. This letter [LexDoc Id : 359329]
HC (Delhi) 2008
Randhir Singh vs UOI Limitation for: Assessment-Termination of proceedings by Settlement Commission-AY 1995-96 and AY 1997-98. The AO received intimation after 31 January 2008 that assessee's proceedings with the settlement commission had been termin [LexDoc Id : 358624]
HC (Punjab and Haryana) 2008
Glaxo India Ltd. vs JCIT [LexDoc Id : 355801]
ITAT (Mumbai) 2008
R. Vijayakumar vs M. Ravindran and Ors. Jurisdiction of the court to auction sell the companys property-Direction to sell the property not challenged, Suppression of material fact -It was well within the jurisdiction of the court to auction sell the property if the company was in possession of the land or if any amount was due to [LexDoc Id : 355339]
HC (Chennai) 2008
 
First | Prev | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | Next | Last