Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.30 seconds)
Kashiba Family Trust vs Income-Tax Officer on 26 July, 1985 cites

Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad vs Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur on 16 October, 1974

In this connection he relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Kasturbai Walchand Trust [1967] 63 ITR 656 and CIT v. Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur [1974] 97 ITR 246. He, however, hastened to state that this action of the beneficiaries would not in any way convert the desire of the settlor as on their own volition they have assigned their interest to the named assignees. In this view of the matter, he submitted that since not applicable of the main Section 164 were to be applied in the instant case, the Commissioner has wrongly passed his order under Section 263, keeping in mind the Explanation inserted in the said Section from 1-4-1980. He, therefore, urged that the order of the Commissioner should be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 54 - H R Khanna - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay vs Smt. Kasturbai Walchand Trust, Bombay on 31 October, 1966

In this connection he relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smt. Kasturbai Walchand Trust [1967] 63 ITR 656 and CIT v. Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan Bahadur [1974] 97 ITR 246. He, however, hastened to state that this action of the beneficiaries would not in any way convert the desire of the settlor as on their own volition they have assigned their interest to the named assignees. In this view of the matter, he submitted that since not applicable of the main Section 164 were to be applied in the instant case, the Commissioner has wrongly passed his order under Section 263, keeping in mind the Explanation inserted in the said Section from 1-4-1980. He, therefore, urged that the order of the Commissioner should be set aside.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 23 - V Bhargava - Full Document
1   2 Next