Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Notification No. S.O. 2029 Date of Issue: 30.06.1962

June 30, 1962 454 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by section 295, of the INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Board of Revenue hereby makes the following rules to amend the INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962, namely :—

Notification No. S.O. 993 Date of Issue: 01.04.1962

April 1, 1962 490 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (iii) of clause 44 of section 2 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby authorises every Gazetted Officer of the Government of Orissa, appointed to perform the functions of a Certificate-Officer under clause (3) of section 3 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (Bihar and Orissa Act IV of 1914), to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer under the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Notification No. S.O. 992 Date of Issue: 01.04.1962

April 1, 1962 567 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (iii) of clause 44 of section 2 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby authorises every Gazetted Officer of the Government of Bihar, appointed to perform the functions of a Certificate Officer under clause (3) of section 3 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act,

Notification No. S.O. 991 Date of Issue: 01.04.1962

April 1, 1962 481 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (iii) of clause (44) of section 2 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby authorises every Gazetted Officer of the Government of West Bengal appointed to perform the functions of a Certificate-Officer under clause (3) of section 3 of the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 (Bengal Act III of 1913), to exercise the powers of a Tax Recovery Officer under the Income-tax Act, 1961

Notification No. S.O.1037, Date of Issue: 06.03.1961

March 6, 1961 1124 Views 0 comment Print

In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (iv) of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies Bharatiya Bhasha Parishad, Calcutta, for the purpose of the said sub-clause for the assessment years 1990-91 to 1992-93 subject to the following conditions, namely

Notification No. S.O.1355, Date of Issue: 16.01.1961

January 16, 1961 666 Views 0 comment Print

It is hereby notified for general information that the institution mentioned below has been approved by the Secretary, Department of Science & Technology, New Delhi, the prescribed authority for the purposes of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 6(iv) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, under the category of “Association” in the area of other natural and applied sciences, subject to the following conditions :—

Companies (Issue of Share Certificates) Rules, 1960

December 31, 1960 3957 Views 0 comment Print

Explore the Companies (Issue of Share Certificates) Rules 1960, governing the issuance, replacement, and records of share certificates under the Companies Act, 1956

All India Reporter Ltd. v. Ramchandra D. Datar AIR 1961 SC 943

November 29, 1960 7592 Views 0 comment Print

In a civil suit the respondent obtained a decree against his employer the appellant company for a sum which included com- pensation for wrongful termination of his service, arrears of salary, interest and costs of the suit, and then applied for execution of the decree.

For Reassessment Issue of notice U/s. 148 is mandatory

December 13, 1958 5535 Views 0 comment Print

Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO (Supreme Court) The notice prescribed by section 148 cannot be regarded as a mere procedural requirement. It is only if the said notice is served on the assessee that the ITO would be justified in taking proceedings against the assessee. If no notice is issued or if the notice issued is shown to be invalid, then the proceedings taken by the ITO would be illegal and void – Y. Narayana Chetty v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC); CIT v. Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi [1967] 66 ITR 147 (SC); CIT v. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala [1971] 82 ITR 821 (SC).

Obvious mistake of law cannot be rectified U/s. 154, while mistake apparent from record can be rectified

April 28, 1958 9039 Views 0 comment Print

Held, that the Income-tax Officer was justified in exercising his powers under s. 35 and rectifying the mistake. As a result of, the legal fiction about the retrospective operation of the Amendment Act, the subsequently inserted proviso must be read as.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
April 2025
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930