Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.27 seconds)C.I.T Mumbai vs Mukesh Ratilal Marolia on 27 January, 2014
11. We further find support from the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay
High Court in CIT Vs. Shri Mukesh Ratilal Marolia in Income Tax Appeal No.456
of 2007, vide order dated 07.09.2011, wherein it was held as under:-
Sumati Dayal vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bangalore on 28 March, 1995
For this
preposition we draw support from the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Sumati Dayal v/s CIT 214 ITR 0801
wherein in the Hon'ble Supreme Court has thus held:
Section 68 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 69 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 139 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Patel Rajeshkumar Kantilal on 3 June, 1998
1 . The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of
Rs.21,96,546/- on account of Unexplained cash credit for Capital Gains on
the basis statement of third party and evidence collected by the
department without giving opportunity of being heard as well as cross
examining the person concerned as per ratio of CIT Vs. Rajeshkumar
(2008) 172 Taxman 74 (Del.)
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs Durga Prasad More on 26 August, 1971
18. "The assesses has placed strong reliance on the sale
transaction which has been routed through Demat account and has
been executed through BSE. There is no dispute that the sale
consideration was received by the assessee from the sale of
shares. What is disputed is that whether they were actually
purchased on the purported date as claimed by the assessee. This
raises the question whether the apparent can be considered as the
real. As laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT
Vs Durga Prasad More 82 ITR 540 (2002-TlOL-877-SC-IT), the
apparent must be considered as real only it is shown that thers are
reasons to believe that the apparent is not the real and that too
'taxing authorities are entitled to look into the surround
circumstances to find out the reality and the matter has to be
considered by applying the test of human probability.
1