Facts of the
Case
Petitioner: Gurinder Singh Sikka filed writ petitions
challenging actions of the Income Tax Department.
Respondent: Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.
The petitions were initially filed but ...
Facts of the Case
The
Income Tax Department (the Petitioners) filed an omnibus challenge under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India against multiple orders passed by
the Board for Industrial &...
Facts of the
CasePetitioner Gurinder Singh Sikka filed writ
petitions before the High Court of Delhi challenging certain actions of the Chief
Commissioner of Income Tax. The petitioner, through his counsel Mr. K.R.
M...
Facts of the
CaseThe petitioner, National Agricultural
Cooperative Marketing Federation of India Ltd., an apex cooperative society
registered under the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 1984, had been
granted de...
Facts
of the Case1.
The
Income Tax Department filed multiple writ petitions challenging various orders
passed by BIFR concerning sick industrial companies.2.  ...
Facts of the
Case:
Ms. Prem Lata Bansal filed multiple tax appeals before the Delhi
High Court.
The combined tax effect of the appeals was ₹8.98 lakhs, which is
below the ₹10 lakhs threshold as per t...
Facts of the
Case:Two petitions, W.P.(C) 15315/2006 filed by M/S Good
Living Consultant P.L and CM(M) 924/2007 filed by the Director of Income Tax
(Investigation), were interlinked and heard together.
Certain amount...
Facts of the
Case:
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) decided the appeal on 28th
February 2007.
The Revenue filed an application under Section 254(2)
seeking rectification of the order, claim...
Facts of the Case
The
assessees filed their Income-Tax Returns declaring Long Term Capital Gains
(LTCG) arising from the sale of certain shares (including shares of M/s
Nagesh Investment Pvt. Ltd. and...
Facts of the
Case:
The petitioner had filed appeals under Section 260A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961.
A Full Bench of the Delhi High Court had previously opined on the
maintainability of such appeals and t...