Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Author: ugjb

August undefined, 2024

WebMay 2, 1988 · Citation. 1988-LL-0502. Appellant Name. CHUHARMAL. Respondent Name. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. Court. SUPREME COURT. Relevant Act.

Chandra Kala Sharma v. Ito Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

WebPunjab & Haryana H.C : Whether the Tribunal was correct in rejecting the assessee’s contention that the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, gives rise to a separate charge as distinguished from the substantive provisions of s. 271 (1 ) (c) and that the provisions of the main s. 271(1)(c) having not been specifically invoked, penalty cannot … Web217 Kms. Distance between Chennai to Chidambaram by Flight is. 197 Kms. Travel Time from Chennai to Chidambaram by Road is. 4:48 hrs. Nearest Airport in Chennai. … how does creatine help you

ITAT Explains Imp Law On Black Money Assessment In Hasan Ali …

WebMay 10, 2024 · Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC) (255) Watches were seized from the bed room of the assessee. The assessee was held to be the owner. Applying … WebJan 18, 2024 · The ld. CIT (A) in the case of Shri Mohinder Singh (seller) observed that he had received a sale consideration of Rs 2,46,30,000/- from the sale of his agricultural land from Shri Malkiat Singh, whereas, the sale deed was executed at much lesser rate. WebThe Revenue, to proceed against the assessee, must have definite information with regard to the assessee being in possession of monies or holding investment. This is in view of th photo cube walgreens

Presumption as to validity of document wouldn’t …

WebJul 25, 2003 · Citation: 2003-LL-0725-5: Appellant Name: ANANDILAL: Respondent Name: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX: Court: ITAT: Relevant Act: Income-tax: Date of Order: 25/07/2003 WebSupreme Court Of India Chuharmal vs. CIT Sections 69A, 271(1)(c) Expln. Asst. Year 1974-75 Sabyasachi Mukharji & S. Ranganathan, JJ. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1863 of 1986 photo cubismWebIn Chuharmal's case [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC), the facts, briefly, were that in January, 1974, on the basis of the order passed by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Jagpur, dated … how does creation catalyst work

"WebA similar question arose before the Supreme Court in Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 70 CTR (SC) 88 : (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC), and while affirming the view of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the aforesaid view was taken and the matter was decided against the assessee. " - Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

M/S Hari Om Dia Jewe... v. The Asst. Commission...

WebMar 19, 2024 · It is necessary, therefore, to understand the importance and scope of the principles of cross examination in income tax proceedings. The Supreme Court in the … WebOn the other hand counsel for the State submitted, relying upon the decision of this Court in Willie (William) Slaney vs. State of Madhya Paradesh AIR 1956 SC 116 and State of …

Did you know?

Web(ITAT) Order on Bofors - The Hindu WebIn Ashok Kumar vs. CIT (1986) 53 CTR (MP) 226 : (1986) 160 ITR 497 (MP), the question that arose for decision was whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to accept the assesseeâ€™s explanation given in respect of cash amounting to Rs. 16,000. ... In Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 70 CTR (SC) 88 : (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC), some wrist ...

WebChuharmal vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC). • In the case of Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd v. WebThe CIT (Appeals), therefore, confirmed the levy of penalty in respect of the concealed income of Rs. 5,73,044. The CIT (Appeals) also relied on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Chuharmal v. CIT[1988] 172 ITR 250/38 Taxman 190, CIT v.

WebJan 4, 2013 · The principle involved, as explained by the apex court in the case of Chuharmal v. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC), referring to section 110 of the Indian … WebWajid Ali Khan vs Puran Singh And Ors. on 11 July, 1924. Citedby 3 docs Sitaram Reddy vs Chinna Ram Reddy And Ors. on 16 April, 1958. Janabai Ammal vs T.A.S. Palani …

WebCreating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to:

WebOct 8, 2024 · The expression ‘income’ under the Act, a term of wide import, is applicable to section 69A, among others, of the Act (refer: Chuharmal vs. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC)). how does creating more jobs help the economyWebMar 12, 2016 · The expression ‘income’ under the Act, a term of wide import, is applicable to section 69A, among others, of the Act (refer: Chuharmal vs. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 … photo cube wifiWebDec 15, 2010 · As rightly pointed out by the assessee even before the ld. CIT (A), the fact of the assessee becoming a major on 7.1.2000 is borne out by the assessees date of birth, which finds mention in the return of income in Form 2B … how does creationism explain dinosaursWebIn Chuharmal vs. CIT, [1988] 172 ITR 250, some wrist watches were seized from the bedroom of the assessee. The Department found that the assessee was the owner of the wrist watches and the High Court relied upon Section 110 of the Evidence Act which stipulates that when the question is whether any person is the photo cue cards speech therapyWebDelhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, to the extent it was levied by reference to the addition of Rs. 19,000 made in the assessment? how does creative development link to mathsWebApr 5, 2024 · Shanta Devi vs CIT (1988) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Where Account books of partnership firm cannot be considered to be assessee- partner’s own book of account and cash credit found therein cannot be charged to tax as assessee-partner’s income u/s 68. photo cube templateWebGet free access to the complete judgment in Commissioner Of Income Tax v. India Sea Foods. on CaseMine. photo cuisine angle