Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.21 seconds)

Income-Tax Officer vs Naresh Batra, Huf on 31 August, 1995

Subsequently, the Assessing Officer entertained a difference of opinion and issued notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act. This is not legally valid. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of the Agra Bench of the Hon'ble ITAT in the case of ITO vs. Haresh Chand Agarwal, HUF in ITA No.282/Agra/2013 dated 20.12.2013 wherein it is held that the provisions u/s 147 can not be applied for applying the provisions u/s 5OC of the I.T. Act. Ld. AR, therefore, submitted that the Assessing Officer is not justified in initiating proceedings u/s 147 of the I. T.Act.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 17 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Dcit, Salem vs Shri P. Anbazhagan, Komarapalayam on 31 January, 2017

8.1 Coming to ld. DR's contention that AO can reopen when there is escapement of income by relying on the case i.e. ACIT Vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Ltd. (supra), wherein, the case was reopened with the audit objection on the assessment u/s 143(1), it was a case in which assessment was completed u/s 143(1) and reopened with the factual findings brought out by the audit party, the Hon'ble High Court has dismissed the case by referring to the facts of Adam Exports Vs. DCIT [1999] 240 ITR 224 (Guj.), as per which the reopened assessment was completed u/s 143(3). Hon'ble Supreme Court distinguished this case and allowed SLP in favour of revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai Cites 13 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1