Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.40 seconds)Section 131 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 153A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 138 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 69B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
S N Enterprises vs Income Tax Officer & Ors. on 27 September, 2022
ITA NO. 3646/MUM/2023(A.Y: 2017-18)
Kundal Raghubir Bhandari
In the case of Dinesh Kumar Jain v. Pr. CIT [2018] 97
taxmann.com 113 (Delhi), the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held
that assessee claimed that he withdrew certain amount from his
bank account for construction of a building and surplus money,
when not required, was re-deposited, in same bank account, since
assessee failed to produce any bills/vouchers relating to
construction, and justify substantial cash withdrawals for meeting
construction cost and re-deposits when money was not required,
additions under section 68 in respect of amount re- deposited was
justified.
Daya Bansal, Delhi vs Acit, Circle- 48(1), New Delhi on 11 February, 2019
KALRA GLASS FACTORY VS SALES TAX TRIBUNAL SUPREME
COURT 167 ITR 488 OF 1987
DHAKESWARI COTTON MILLS LTD. vs. C.LT., 26 ITR 775
(SC)
KRISHNA CHAND CHELA RAM V CIT 125 ITR 713 SUPREME
COURT
Page No. | 12
ITA NO. 3646/MUM/2023(A.Y: 2017-18)
Kundal Raghubir Bhandari
AMITABH BANSAL, DELHI V. ITO, [ITA 7804/DEL/2018] DATED
11.02.2019
CHARTERED MOTORS PVT. LTD. V/S ACIT (ITA NO.
Hero Honda Motors Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax. Dy. ... on 23 November, 1994
KALRA GLASS FACTORY VS SALES TAX TRIBUNAL SUPREME
COURT 167 ITR 488 OF 1987
DHAKESWARI COTTON MILLS LTD. vs. C.LT., 26 ITR 775
(SC)
KRISHNA CHAND CHELA RAM V CIT 125 ITR 713 SUPREME
COURT
Page No. | 12
ITA NO. 3646/MUM/2023(A.Y: 2017-18)
Kundal Raghubir Bhandari
AMITABH BANSAL, DELHI V. ITO, [ITA 7804/DEL/2018] DATED
11.02.2019
CHARTERED MOTORS PVT. LTD. V/S ACIT (ITA NO.