Shri. Jitendra Virwani, Bangalore vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 23 June, 2021
In the case of VXL India Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1995] 215 ITR 295 the
Gujarat High Court has held as under:-
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.84 seconds)M/S Grand Slam Pvt. Ltd.,, New Delhi vs Ito, New Delhi on 9 June, 2017
(1999) 152 CTR (SC) 418 : (1999) 236 ITR 34 (SC), Praful Chunilal Patel
vs. M.J. Makwana, Asstt. CIT (1998) 148 CTR (Guj) 62 : (1999) 236 ITR
832 (Guj); Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd. vs. ITO & Ors. (1981) 22 CTR
(SC) 112 : (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC); Birla VXL Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (1996)
130 CTR (Guj) 281 : (1996) 217 ITR 1 (Guj); Sheo Narain Jaiswal & Ors.
vs. ITO & Ors. (1989) 176 ITR 352 (Pat); Phool Chand Bajrang Lal &
Anr. vs. ITO & Anr. (1993) 113 CTR (SC) 436 : (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC);
Anant Kumar Saharia vs. CIT & Ors. (1999) 151 CTR (Gau) 556 : (1998)
232 ITR 533 (Gau); Bombay Pharma Products vs. ITO (1999) 153 CTR
(MP) 350 : (1999) 237 ITR 614 (MP); H.A. Nanji & Co. vs. ITO (1979)
120 ITR 593 (Cal); N.D. Bhatt, IAC & Anr. vs. I.B.M. World Trade
Corporation (1993) 115 CTR (Bom) 103 : (1995) 216 ITR 811 (Bom);
Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. R.B. Wadkar (2004) 190 CTR (Bom) 166 :
Garden Silk Mills Limited vs Assistant Commisioner Of Income Tax ... on 1 March, 2021
(c) In the decision of this Court in case of VXL India
Capital Ltd Vs. Asst. CIT (1995) 215 ITR 295,
wherein, it was held that " the scope of Section 147 of the
Act is not for reviewing its earlier order sou-motu,
irrespective of there being any material to come to a
different conclusion apart from just having second
thoughts about the inferences drawn earlier."
Income Tax Officer, Ward - 3(2)(3), ... vs Sri Made Gowda Thibbe Gowda, Bangalore on 29 September, 2021
In the case of VXL India Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [1995] 215 ITR 295 the
Gujarat High Court has held as under:-
Garden Silk Mills Limited vs Assistant Commisioner Of Income Tax ... on 1 March, 2021
(c) In the decision of this Court in case of VXL India
Capital Ltd Vs. Asst. CIT (1995) 215 ITR 295,
wherein, it was held that " the scope of Section 147 of the
Act is not for reviewing its earlier order sou-motu,
irrespective of there being any material to come to a
different conclusion apart from just having second
thoughts about the inferences drawn earlier."
The Travancore Diagnostics P.Ltd, ... vs Assessee on 12 February, 2015
The Assessing officer noticed that the assessee
had not maintained copies of his bills issued to the patients for the earlier years to
substantiate the receipts admitted in the books of accounts. However according to
the Ld. AR, there no valid material in the possession of the Assessing Officer to
establish suppression of income because of the survey. This is enough for the
initiation of re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. The Ld. AR
relied on the decision of the supreme Court in the case of ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal
Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC), ITO vs. Madnani Engineering Works Ltd. (1979) 118
ITR 1 (SC), Birla VXL Ltd. Vs. Asstt. CIT (1996) 217 ITR 1(Guj.
1