LexLords NRI Legal Services Ludhiana by NRI Legal Services LexLords

NRI legal services - https://lexlords.com/domestic-violence-act/ - https://lexlords.com/transfer-of-property/ - https://lexlords.com/transfer-of-property/ . True it is, that the Deputy Commissioner of Appeals has been construed in terms of Section 246 of the Act to be an appellate forum from the orders as enumerated in sub-section (1) thereof, but in absence of any provision in the statute nominating the Deputy Director of Income Tax to be an appellate forum for any order/decision of the assessing officer/I. The omission to either vest the Deputy Director of Income Tax with the appellate powers or to contemplate the said post to be an appellate forum from the orders/decisions of the assessing officers cannot thus be accidental or unintended. This provision even if read liberally does not provide for reservation for in-service candidates, but only of giving a weightage in the form of incentive marks as specified to the class of in- service candidates (who have served in notified remote and difficult areas in the State). A judgment which has no relevance to the issue before us The view of the Division Bench is clearly erroneous and cannot be sustained. Shanti Conductors (P) Ltd. 03 acres, as specified below within the aforesaid NRI Legal Services - https://lexlords.com/divorce/ Mouza (emphasis laid by this Court) A perusal of the said notification makes it clear that it does not specifically mention that the land in question is being acquired in favour of WBIDC. This is more so as noticed hereinabove, the Deputy Director of Income Tax, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have been otherwise placed at par in the list of income tax authorities provided by Section 116 of the Act. So also challenge is to the notification under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act by applying the urgency clause. Rami Reddy, (2008) 5 SCC 535, Arulvelu v. and finally held that they are not debarred under Article 233. The relevant provisions of the Act pertaining to the powers, duties and jurisdiction of the various income tax authorities do not leave any room for doubt, in our estimate, to conclude otherwise. 469 of 2004 (M/B) 874 of 2004 (M/B) the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act has been challenged. State, NRI Legal Services - https://lexlords.com/careers/ (2009) 10 SCC 206, Ram Singh v. , (2010) 2 SCC 445 and Babu v. , (2006) 9 SCC 731, S. As regards the second question, Mr. " The controversy arose between the parties during proceedings for assessment of excess profits tax for five chargeable accounting periods ending on the 31st December of each of the years 1939 to 1943. Thus understood, the Central Enactment and the Regulations framed thereunder do not provide for reservation for in-service candidates in Post Graduate Degree Courses. As there is no express provision prohibiting reservation to in-service candidates in respect of admission to Post Graduate Degree Courses, it was contended that providing for such reservation by the State Government is not impermissible in law. In this persuasive backdrop, the conferment of appellate jurisdiction on the Deputy Commissioner of Appeals from the orders/decisions of the assessing officers as is apparent from Section 246 of the Act, has to be construed as a conscious statutory mandate. Before we part with this judgment, it appears to be necessary to draw attention of all concerned to a vital issue of composition and functioning of Tribunals and statutory framework thereof especially its impact on working of this Court and in turn on the rule of law. Deputy Director of Income Tax cannot be construed to be one before whom an appeal from any order/decision of any income tax authority, lower in rank would ordinarily lie. In the case of appellant M/s. Further, there are precedents of this Court to suggest that such arrangement is permissible as a separate channel of admission for in-service candidates. 840 of 2004 (M/B) there is a common challenge to the notification which provides for the acquisition of the land for extension of the Secretariat as also for the expansion of the road. "Whether in the facts and circumstances of these cases, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the directors of the respondent company had a controlling interest in it as contemplated by section 2 (21) of the Excess Profits Tax Act. Proposal numbers 3 and 4 of Cabinet Memo, referred to supra, approved by the Chief Minister make it clear that acquisition of land comprising of 1053 acres is needed for the Small Car Project of TML and 200 acres of land is needed to cater to the housing and social infrastructure needs of the project. Kolah the learned counsel for the company, frankly conceded that the view taken by the High Court on this part of the case is not open to challenge and is correct. , (2003) 1 SCC 761, Budh Singh v. itself decided along with Purbanchal Cables (supra) aforesaid findings have NRI Legal Services - https://lexlords.com/can-nri-file-divorce-case-without-coming-india/ been recorded by this Court while remanding the case to the High Court for decision on merits as an appeal arising of same lis was pending before the High Court and the High Court has rightly followed the decisions in Purbanchal Cables it is hereby notified that for the above purpose an area of land comprising RS/LR plots as detailed below and measuring more or less, 72. , the inevitable conclusion is that the said authority i. These notifications are different n"In these three writ petitions, particularly in writ petition No. It merely states that the land in question might be needed for Government / Government Undertaking/Development Authorities. The 211 High Court held that the profits for three months from the 1st January, 1946, to the 1st April, 1946, were not reserves which would attract the application of rule 2 of Schedule In our view, none of the Attorney/Public Prosecutor/Deputy Advocate General, ceased to be advocate and since each one of them continued to be advocate, they cannot be considered to be in the service of the Union or the State within the meaning of Article 233(2).