Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 352 (1.64 seconds)
Documents citing Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs C.I.T. Bombay on 25 October, 1954

Arunachalam Muthu vs Nafan Bv on 30 November, 2012

After considering the judgments in Dhirajlal Girdharilal vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay (supra), which is the basis of the judgment cited by the Appellant in Ascu Arch Timber Protection Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 19:27:04 ::: KPP -88- Company Appeal (L) No. 28 of 2012 Calcutta (supra) and State of Orissa & Ors. vs. Bidyabhushan Mohapatra (supra), in paragraph 15, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus:
Bombay High Court Cites 71 - Cited by 0 - S J Kathawalla - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar And ... vs S. P. Jain. on 29 February, 1968

In Rattan Cloth House v. Commissioner of Income-tax, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana said that the findings of the Tribunal, even though on questions of fact, will be liable to be set aside by the High Court on a reference if the findings are based partly on evidence and partly on suspicions, conjectures or surmises, because the decision in Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Bhaichand Amoluk & Co. v. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Patna High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sikkim Subba Associates vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. [Alongwith ... on 31 May, 2005

64. The satisfaction of the concerned officer is "subjective satisfaction" as the same is based on the information i.e., documents, etc. before him and it is after evaluating these documents, etc. that he forms a belief. As the satisfaction is subjective the principles laid down in Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. CIT (supra) at p. 273, Zora Singh v. J.M. Tandon AIR 1971 SC 1537 at para 10 (p. 1540) and Union of India v. Parma Nanda (1989) 2 SCC 177 at p. 24 are applicable. In these cases, it is held that in a matter of subjective satisfaction where the authority acts on material partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding, that such finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material.
Sikkim High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 5 - N S Singh - Full Document

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs Acit Central Circle-17, New Delhi on 30 August, 2024

iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT, Bombay When a Court of fact acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 116 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs Acit Central Circle-17, New Delhi on 30 August, 2024

iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT, Bombay When a Court of fact acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 116 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Anil Chaudhary, New Delhi vs Acit Central Circle-17, New Delhi on 30 August, 2024

iii) 26 ITR 736 (SC) Dhirajlal Girdharilal v CIT, Bombay When a Court of fact acts on material, partly relevant and partly irrelevant, it is impossible to say to what extent the mind of the Court was affected by the irrelevant material used by it in arriving at its finding. Such a finding is vitiated because of the use of inadmissible material
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 116 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhaichand Amoluk & Co. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... on 7 November, 1960

"We must read the order of the Tribunal as a whole to determine whether every material fact, for and against the assessee, has been considered fairly and with due care; whether the evidence pro and con has been considered in reaching the final conclusion; and whether the conclusion reached by the Tribunal has been coloured by irrelevant consideration or matters of prejudice. Learned counsel for the appellant has taken us through the entire order of the Tribunal as also the relevant materials on which it is based. Having examined the order of the Tribunal and those materials, we are unable to agreed with learned counsel for the appellant that the order of the Tribunal is vitiated by any of the defects adverted to in Dhirajlal Girdharilal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, or Omar Salay Mohamed Sait v. Commissioner of Income-tax. We must make it clear that we do not think that those decisions required that the order of the Tribunal must be examined sentence by sentence, through a microscope as it were, so as to discover a minor lapse here or an incautious opinion there to be used as a peg on which to hang an issue of law. In view of the arguments advanced before us it is perhaps necessary to add that in considering probabilities properly arising from the facts alleged or proved, the Tribunal does not indulge in conjectures, surmises or suspicions.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 17 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next