Cit vs hindustan bulk carriers
Web1 CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, (2003) 3 SCC 57, p. 74. 2) The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences.2 3) When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the ... WebCIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2003)3 SCC 57 the Supreme Court laid down five principles of rule of harmonious construction:- The courts must avoid a head-on clash of …
Cit vs hindustan bulk carriers
Did you know?
WebMay 1, 2014 · The Supreme Court in CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 259 ITR 449 observed: “Whenever it is possible to do so, it must be done to construe the provisions which appear to conflict so that they ‘harmonise’. It should not be lightly assumed that Parliament had given with one hand what it took away with the other.
WebJun 25, 2024 · Hindustan Bulk Carriers:- The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must construe the contradictory provisions … WebJun 2, 2011 · The Hon’ble Supreme Court had in the case of CIT vs. Damani Brothers 259 ITR 475 and CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers 259 ITR 449 held that interest u/ss. 234A, 234B and 234C is mandatory and the Settlement Commission had no power to reduce or waive such interest. In view of these decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court which were …
WebIn CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers, the supreme court stated five important principles and they are: The courts must avoid a clash on contradicting provisions and they … WebFeb 6, 2024 · The Supreme Court laid down five principles of rule of Harmonious Construction in the landmark case of CIT v Hindustan Bulk Carriers: The courts must …
Web3 CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers 2003 TAXLR 102. Jus Corpus Law Journal (JCLJ) www.juscorpus.com VOL. 1 ISSUE 1 180 4. Courts must also bear in mind that harmonious construction is not an understanding that reduces one clause to useless numbers or dead. 5. Harmonization is not the dissolution or making of any constitutional provision
WebJun 28, 2012 · That is clearly an absurdity. As to what should be done in such a situation, we find guidance from the observations made by Honble Supreme Court, in the case CIT vs Hindustan Bulk Carriers Ltd (259 ITR 449), as follows: … target account online paymentWebof Income Tax vs. Hindustan Bulk Carrier, the application can be seen in several landmark judgements before that, both pre – independence and post – independence. Several judgements have applied these principles implicitly and the same is reflected in their interpretation of legislations while adjudicating disputes. 1. Venkataramana Devaru v. target accept ebt food stampsWebMar 17, 2024 · M/S Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2000) is a landmark case where the Supreme Court laid down five main principles that govern the rule of harmonious … target account name is incorrect errorWebAug 12, 2024 · The Supreme Court laid down the principles of Rule of harmonious construction in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers:- 1. The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them. target absolute football cardsWebDec 17, 2002 · Hindustan Bulk Carriers Arijit Pasayat, J.— A question of seminal importance relating to the period for which interest in terms of Section 234-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) can be levied when the Settlement Commission (in short “the Commission”) passes an order under Section 245-D of the Act, is the subject-matter ... target account ordersWebAug 15, 2015 · Sathe has appeared in a number of landmark matters in the Supreme Court and the High Courts such as CIT vs. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2002) 258 ITR 399 (SC), CIT vs. Gabriel India Ltd (1989) 179 ITR 54 (Bom), CIT vs. LIC Housing Finance Ltd (2014) 367 ITR 458 (Bom) etc. He was designated Senior Advocate on 23.07.2005 and was … target account name is incorrect file shareWebCommissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S. Hindustan Bulk Carriers on 17 December, 2002 Author: A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat CASE NO.: PETITIONER: Commissioner of … target account selling methodology