Practice Areas
Indirect Tax Cases
Direct Tax Cases
Intellectual Property
All Practice Areas
All Courts
Filter by Jurisdiction
All Courts
SC & All High Courts
All Tribunals
+ Income Tax Appellate Tribunal7863
+ Delhi High Court520
+ Central Information Commission425
+ Allahabad High Court413
+ Bombay High Court318
+ Calcutta High Court296
+ Madras High Court290
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court206
+ Rajasthan High Court185
+ Kerala High Court175
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court153
+ Supreme Court Of India153
+ Gujarat High Court134
+ Central Administrative Tribunal132
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court113
+ Karnataka High Court93
+ Patna High Court92
+ CESTAT65
+ Telangana High Court64
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court63
+ Gauhati High Court47
+ Orissa High Court29
+ SEBI26
+ Appellate Tribunal- Prevention Of Money Laundering Act24
+ Chhattisgarh High Court20
+ Company Law Board18
+ Jharkhand High Court16
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court12
+ Debts Recovery Tribunal11
+ Uttarakhand High Court11
+ National Company Law Appellate Tribunal9
+ Privy Council9
+ Appellate Tribunal For Forfeited Property8
+ National Company Law Tribunal8
+ National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission8
+ Appellate Tribunal For Electricity6
+ National Green Tribunal6
+ District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission5
+ State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission5
+ Authority for Advance Rulings, GST3
+ Board of Revenue3
+ Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal3
+ Intellectual Property Appellate Board3
+ Tripura High Court3
+ Armed Forces Tribunal2
+ Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling, GST1
+ Appellate Tribunal For Foreign Exchange1
+ Authority For Advance Rulings1
+ Board For Industrial Financial Reconstruction1
+ Competition Appellate Tribunal1
+ Manipur High Court1
+ Securities Appellate Tribunal1
+ Settlement Commission1
+ Sikkim High Court1
+ Trade Marks Registry1
+ AAR-GST0
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Appellate Tribunal0
+ Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India0
+ Appellate Tribunal for Forfeited Property0
+ Board of Revenue, Rajasthan0
+ Central Board of Excise & Customs0
+ Central Electricity Regulatory Commission0
+ Collector Appeals0
+ Commissioner (Appeals)0
+ Competition Commission Of India0
+ Consumer Disputes Redressal0
+ Copyright Board0
+ Cyber Appellate Tribunal0
+ Deputy Collector0
+ District Court0
+ First Appellate Authority0
+ Insolvency And Bankruptcy Board Of India0
+ Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court0
+ Meghalaya High Court0
+ Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission0
+ National Anti-Profiteering Authority0
+ Petroleum And Natural Gas Regulatory Board0
+ RERA0
+ Railway Claims Tribunal0
+ Right to Information0
+ Telecom Disputes Settlement And Appellate Tribunal0
Apply Filter
Court Filter
+ RBI
+ SEBI
+ Andhra Pradesh
+ Arunachal Pradesh
+ Assam
+ Bihar
+ Chandigarh
+ Chhattisgarh
+ Delhi
+ Goa
+ Gujarat
+ Haryana
+ Himachal Pradesh
+ Jharkhand
+ Karnataka
+ Kerala
+ Madhya Pradesh
+ Maharashtra
+ Manipur
+ Meghalaya
+ Mizoram
+ Nagaland
+ Odisha
+ Punjab
+ Rajasthan
+ Sikkim
+ Tamil Nadu
+ Telangana
+ Tripura
+ Uttarakhand
+ Uttar Pradesh
+ West Bengal
+ Supreme Court Of India
+ Allahabad High Court
+ Andhra Pradesh High Court
+ Bombay High Court
+ Calcutta High Court
+ Chhattisgarh High Court
+ Delhi High Court
+ Gauhati High Court
+ Himachal Pradesh High Court
+ Jammu and Kashmir High Court
+ Jharkhand High Court
+ Karnataka High Court
+ Kerala High Court
+ Madhya Pradesh High Court
+ Madras High Court
+ Manipur High Court
+ Meghalaya High Court
+ Orissa High Court
+ Patna High Court
+ Punjab & Haryana High Court
+ Rajasthan High Court
+ Sikkim High Court
+ Telangana High Court
+ Tripura High Court
+ Uttarakhand High Court
Apply Filter
Apply Filter
Judge Filter
Filter by Judge (Beta)
Judge Name
Bench
Other Filters
To
2021 Onwards2322
From 2011 To 20206035
From 2001 To 2010737
From 1991 To 2000577
From 1981 To 1990937
From 1971 To 1980327
From 1961 To 1970112
From 1951 To 196064
Before 1950113

Cases cited for the legal proposition you have searched for.

...Brothers and Others [1969] 74 ITR 836 (SC), and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation), Income- Tax [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC...the AO could not have proceeded under Section 158-BC. He relied on ITO, Special Investigation Circle v. Seth.... 2. Following questions of law were admitted by this Court :- 153/2003 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal 2was right...

...ITO, Special Investigation Circle v. Seth Brothers and Others [1969] 74 ITR 836 (SC) , and Pooran Mal v. D...law were admitted by this Court :- 153/2003 "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right and justified...in holding that no legal search has taken place in the case of the assessee under Section 132(1), as specifically the name of the assessee was not mentioned in the search warrant and consequently...

...Brothers and Others [1969] 74 ITR 836 (SC), and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation), Income- Tax [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC...the AO could not have proceeded under Section 158-BC. He relied on ITO, Special Investigation Circle v. Seth.... 2. Following questions of law were admitted by this Court :- 153/2003 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal 2was right...

...Brothers and Others [1969] 74 ITR 836 (SC), and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation), Income- Tax [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC...the AO could not have proceeded under Section 158-BC. He relied on ITO, Special Investigation Circle v. Seth.... 2. Following questions of law were admitted by this Court :- 153/2003 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal 2was right...

...Brothers and Others [1969] 74 ITR 836 (SC), and Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (Investigation), Income- Tax [1974] 93 ITR 505 (SC...the AO could not have proceeded under Section 158-BC. He relied on ITO, Special Investigation Circle v. Seth.... 2. Following questions of law were admitted by this Court :- 153/2003 1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal 2was right...

...J.C Shah, J.— M/s Seth Brothers run a flour mill in the name and style of “Imperial Flour Mills”. From April 1, 1953 to March, 1956, the business was carried on by M/s Seth...protest. In the meantime information was received by the Income Tax Commissioner, U.P, that M/s Seth Brothers were maintaining “duplicate records” and were evading assessment of their true income and...that it was necessary to seize the records which may be found at “Shanti Niketan” Meerut in which M/s Seth Brothers carried on the business of Imperial Flour Mill and other businesses. The Commissioner...

...assessment years 1958–59, 1959–60 and 1960–61. M/s. Goel Brothers had filed income-tax return for the aforesaid years in the status of a firm. The ITO took the view that the business carried on in the name of...issued to M/s. Goel Brothers, that could have been done at any time in view of s. 150(1) of the Act and there were no fetters on the power of the ITO to bring the income of M/s. Goel Brothers to tax. We...M/s. Goel Brothers actually belonged to M/s. Kanodia Brothers and, consequently, the income returned by M/s. Goel Brothers was included in the income of Kanodia Brothers while making their assessments...

...stipulated by law is not a continuing offence. This aspect is relevant in the matter of imposition of penalty and its quantification. In the decision of his Court in CWT v. Suresh Seth...Jain Brothers v. Union of India (1969) 3 SCC 311, AIR 1970 SC 778...1965-66 had been filed on March 18, 1971, and for which assessment was made on March 22, 1971, the ratio of Jain Brothers case (1969...

....2. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be shortly stated. On November 12, 1949, the plaintiffs Ghanshyam Dass and his two minor brothers Shree Ram and Mohan Lal brought the suit out...given by Seth Lachman Dass could not ensure for the benefit of the plaintiffs and therefore the suit was bad for want of a notice under Section 80 of the Code. The learned Civil Judge, however, held that...Madras v. C.P Agencies AIR 1960 SC 1309 and Amar Nath Dogra v. Union Of India . AIR 1963 SC 424, (1963) 1 SCR 657, (1965) 2...

...at Ranavav. He therefore asked the ITO, Junagad to make detailed enquiries of cloth merchants and others known to the appellant who might give useful information in the matter. Pursuant to this letter...from the Additional ITO Madurai, Harjivan Trikamji Mehtaji of Messrs Shariff Hassan and Brothers, Jusub Abubucker and one Haji Dada Abdul Kassim were examined before the ITO Junagad on March 15, 1951...Bai Ahamed, the maternal grandmother of Kathija Bai Habib, wife of the appellant. The appellant was called upon to explain these entries and he made his statement on January 26, 1949 before the ITO who...

...Hon'ble Supreme Court of India [Ashish Seth v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Others];(g) WP (Crl.) No. 11 of 2015 on the file of Hon'ble...Supreme Court of India [Surender Seth v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Others].whereas Criminal Case No. 235 of 2014, filed by one Mr Hari Mohan...and considered.16.3. Criminal proceedings were initiated against Ashish Seth of Seth Group and others which was the subject-matter before this Court in Writ Petition...

...was incorporated in the year 1942. Amongst others Ram Rattan and Ramji Das were its promoters, Messrs. Seth Brothers (Private) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Seth Brothers) were the managing age...the National Industries and Kishori Lal, Ram Rattan and Parshotam Pershad were the directors of Seth Brothers. It may be, however, stated that most of the directors in all these companies are inter...books of National Industries more than Rs. 2,17,000 was to the credit of Seth Brothers and to that extent National Industries were the debtors of Seth Brothers. Seth Brothers, in turn, we...

...application was moved by Seth Champalal Sheonarayanji Rathi, Seth Laxminarayanji Rathi and some others on 30-8-1953 before the Registrar for registration of a trust known as Maheshwari Panchayati...was established by His Holiness Param Vaishnav Raghu Nath Ji Vyas and he himself along with his two brothers, namely, Pandit Durga Prasad and Pandit Narayan Prasad were the trustees thereof. Another...Mandir, Harda and this application was registered as Case No. 206. Seth Champalal Sheonarayanji Rathi was the father of the appellant Seth Chand Ratan. Seth Chand Ratan moved an application on 7-2-1955...

...three brothers, each had a share the value of which was fixed at Rs. 30,000, and that he should be deemed to have obtained transfer of their right, title or interest in that property. The ITO did not...of his having improved and developed the family properties. This consideration was made up of the value of the shares of the three brothers in the Madanapalle house, each share being valued at Rs.... 30,000. The three brothers, by separate documents styled as release deeds, relinquished their rights, title and interest in that undivided house at Madanapalle. The share of the three brothers was fixed...

...quashed the protective assessments made by the ITO, and held that Seth Gopaldas be taxed on the entire income. Then the assessee filed two appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal...the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the endowment alleged by Seth Gopaldas is valid according to law ? 2. Whether the...Tribunal was right in holding that only the extra income of the Mandir, which has been utilised by Seth Gopaldas, could be treated as Seth Gopaldas' own income and consequently meaning that the entire income...

...behalf of the assessed on one pretext or the other. Finally, the assessed responded on 23rd March, 2000 asking the Assessing Officer to give documents submitted by Smt. Pushpa Seth and asking to fix...been contended by the learned Counsel for the Revenue that due opportunity was given to the assessed but assessed never asked for the cross-examination of Smt. Pushpa Seth and sought adjournments on...Officer has recorded the statement of Smt. Pushpa Seth. During the assessment proceedings, certain questions were put to her. The relevant questions and answers with regard to the sale of the property...

...JUDGMENT Verma and Seth, JJ. 1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 8.8.2002 passed by IV M.A.C.T., Indore, in M.V. Case No. 154 of 1996. 2..., r/o Sant Nagar, Ujjain is mentioned. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are brothers. They had filed their common written statement. The stand taken in the written statement was that their vehicle was not...holding a proper and effective licence on the date of accident. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are the brothers and they must be aware of true picture. This aspect of the matter is also considered by the...

.... Thereafter, Madhav Prashad left the work of munshi and both the brothers started grain business in the name of “Munshi Madhav Prashad”, by setting up a shop. The case of the plaintiff is that both...Rukhmabai v. Lala Laxminarayan (1960) 2 SCR 253, AIR 1960 SC 335 and...mortgage deed by which 5 houses were mortgaged in favour of Seth Budhmal on 1-12-1944 and 26-11-1946. It is not disputed that there were 6 houses, some single-storeyed and some double-storeyed in Ashok...

.... ITO (1959) 38 ITR 316; and Sm. Champa Kumari Singhi v. Additional Member, Board of Revenue, West Bengal...Hindu family which owned extensive property in Jaora State and a sugar mill called “Seth Govindram Sugar Mills” at Mahidpur Road in Holkar State. In the year 1942 Bachhulal filed a suit for partition...the joint family, namely, the three widows and the two minor sons shown in the genealogy. After the death of Nandlal, Bachhulal carried on the business of the Sugar Mills in the name of “Seth Govindram...

...T.S Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers, [1971] 82 ITR 50. The Supreme Court...time, and has been followed by other High Courts. Thus, for example, in the case of V.P Minocha, ITO v. ITAT, [1977] 106...the observation of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. A. Raman and Co., [1968] 67 ITR 11, and held that, if, by adopting a device...