Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.41 seconds)
Documents citing Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Khushi Ram Bhagwan Dass on 2 December, 2004

Ito, Patiala vs Sh. Dharam Pal Goyal, Patiala on 25 April, 2017

7(i) Ld. Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, relied upon the order of the CIT (Appeals) and further placed reliance on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Khushi Ram Bhagwan Dass reported in 296 ITR 720 and pointed out that the said decision clearly stated that sales tax collections accounted for by the assessee following the mercantile system of accounting which remained payable was to be excluded from the assessee's business income and that the assessee was merely a trustee in respect of collection of Central Sales Tax from its customers.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs P.N. Tuli on 24 January, 2005

11. For asst. yrs. 1970-71 and 1971-72, the assessments again become barred by time on 31st March, 1979. By that time no returns had been filed. The assessments for these years could not even be reopened under Section 17(1) as the period of 8 years prescribed thereunder had also expired. The returns were filed by the assessee after the assessments had become barred by time and such returns, therefore, were non est in law. This was so held by Hon'ble the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Bhagwan Dass Amar Singh . That was a case of a return under the IT Act, 1922, and the question was whether the assessee having filed a return voluntarily after the expiry of the period of limitation, could action under Section 34 of the IT Act, 1922, be validly taken ignoring the voluntary return. It was held that a return filed after the expiry of the period of limitation was non est in law.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - V Mittal - Full Document
1