Search Results for "asset"

1389 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1389 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Income Tax Case Regarding Set Off of Unabsorbed Business Loss Against Profits of Erstwhile 10A Unit. Tribunal's Order Allowing Set Off of Brought Forward Loss of Assessment Year 2002-03 Against Profits of 10A Unit in Assessment Year 2005-06 Upheld.

The case involves two appeals by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, M...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Income Tax Case on Disallowance Under Section 14A and TP Adjustment on Guarantee Commission. ITAT's Restriction of Disallowance to Rs.1,00,000/- and Deletion of TP Addition Upheld as No Substantial Question of Law Arises.

The case pertains to an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai (the revenue) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (I...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Summary Judgment for Debenture Trustee in Recovery Suit Against Corporate Guarantor. Defendant's Triable Issues Found to be Sham and Moonshine, Entitling Plaintiff to Judgment Under Order 37 CPC.

The plaintiff, IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd., filed a summary suit under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, against the defendant, Hubtow...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Winding Up Petition Against Hubtown Ltd. Based on Bona Fide Dispute of Debt. Corporate Guarantee Enforcement Requires Prima Facie Case of Default and Absence of Substantial Dispute Under Section 433(e) of Companies Act, 1956.

The petitioner, IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd., filed a company petition under Section 433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up of Hubtown...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Arbitration Petitions Challenging Appointment of Sole Arbitrator in Property Dispute. Court holds that appointment of arbitrator by consent of parties is valid and cannot be challenged under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The judgment pertains to two arbitration petitions filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioners in Arbitratio...