Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Supreme Court: The 2-judge bench of AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ has held that for bringing any particular foreign exchange receipt
Supreme Court: In some relief to the financially stressed telecom giant Vodafone Idea, the bench of UU Lalit and Vineet Saran, JJ
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of AM Khanwilkar, Hemant Gupta and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ has the constitutional validity of clause (f) of
Supreme Court: IN a major for the NDTV Ltd, the bench of L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ has quashed the
G.S.R. 960(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 269SU read with Section 295 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961),
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, Indira Banerjee and MR Shah, JJ has held that mere mentioning of the new
Supreme Court: On the question relating to assessment of the taxable income of a Co-operative Society engaged in the business of production
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of Dr. AK Sikri, SA Nazeer and MR Shah, JJ decided an issue relating to interpretation of
The head of a prominent organisation allegedly indulging in anti-national activities along with his associates were covered in a sensitive search action
Supreme Court: The 3-judge Bench of Dr. AK Sikri, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ asked the Central Government to make necessary
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench comprising of S.C. Dharmadhikari and B.P. Colabawalla, JJ. dismissed an appeal filed under Section 260-A of
G.S.R. 647(E).- In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 295 read with sub-section (1) of Section 245Q of the Income Tax
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench of the High Court comprising of S. Murlidhar and Pratibha M. Singh JJ, held that the
Karnataka High Court: While delivering the judgment in the writ appeal filed under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act praying
Supreme Court: The bench of Dr. A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ, upholding the validity of Section 139AA of Income Tax Act,
Supreme Court: Answering the question as to whether the phrase “income which does not form part of total income under this Act”
Supreme Court: Explaining the term ‘dividend’ under Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Court said that the said provision
Supreme Court: Deciding the question as to whether a former ‘ruler’ is entitled to get full benefit of the exemption granted to
Supreme Court: Deciding the question that whether the Deputy Director of Income Tax was competent to make complaint regarding commission of offence
Supreme Court: In a case where the assessment order for actor Amitabh Bachchan’s income in the year 2001-2002 was in question, the