Search Results for "Assistant Commissioner order"

5548 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 5548 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Judicature at Bombay Considers Wealth Tax References and Writ Petition on Inclusion of Seized Gold in Net Wealth. Assessee Challenged Valuation of Gold Seized Under Gold Control Act, Claiming Nil Value Due to Confiscation and Revenue's Prevention of Investment in Exempt Gold Bonds.

The matters before the Bombay High Court comprised wealth tax applications, references, income tax appeals, and a writ petition arising from inclusion...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

KAHC010059832012_1

The available text of the judgment only includes the list of parties in W.P.No.27674/2012 and connected cases, filed as a Public Interest Litigation b...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes VAT Assessment Order for FY 2013-14 Against Luxembourg-Based Companies Due to Gross Violation of Natural Justice and Backdating of Order. Assessment order found to be pre-dated and based on no notice or hearing, rendering it null and void.

The petitioners, comprising two Luxembourg-based companies (Petitioners 1 and 2) and their Indian group company (Petitioner 3), challenged an assessme...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

WRIT PETITION NO.5134 OF 2018

...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Land Allotment for Temple Construction — No Public Interest Violation Found. Court held that allotment of land for a temple under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code does not require public auction and is permissible for religious purposes.

The judgment pertains to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by two petitioners, Bapu Shankar Dighe and Dadasaheb Kusabapu Pawar, challenging the...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Patent Infringement Suits as Patents Were Revoked Prior to Filing. Summary Judgment Granted Under Order XIII-A CPC as Plaintiff Had No Locus Standi to Sue for Infringement of Revoked Patents.

The plaintiff, Bharat Bhogilal Patel, filed two suits for infringement of two patents granted in 2003. The defendants, TVS Electronics Ltd. and Kalelk...