Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
5 judgments · newest first · showing 1–5
The appellant, Amrit Banaspati Co. Ltd., owned a residential flat in Mumbai and declared its value under self‑assessment rules (Rule 3‑7) of Schedule III of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The Assessing Officer (AO) found a large disparity between the declared value and the market value estimated by the …
The Supreme Court examined whether the term "change of opinion" in Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was eliminated after the 1 April 1989 amendment. The Court traced the evolution of Section 147 from its original wording, through the 1987 amendment that introduced "opinion", to the 1989 …
The Supreme Court examined whether Dearness Allowance (DA), City Compensatory Allowance (CCA) and House Rent Allowance (HRA) paid to government employees fall within the definition of "salary" under Section 17 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and are therefore taxable. The appellants argued that these …
The respondent, Arunagiri Chettriar, retired from a partnership firm in 1963 and later the firm was dissolved. The Income Tax Officer issued a notice that the respondent was jointly and severally liable for tax arrears of the firm for assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64, arguing that liability …
The Supreme Court examined the validity of Sections 44AC and 206C of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961, which allow tax to be levied on a presumptive basis on traders of specified goods. Petitioners argued that the provisions were ultra‑violes, beyond Parliament’s competence under Schedule VII, Entry 82, …
