Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.76 seconds)

Calcutta Discount Company Limited vs Income-Tax Officer, Companies ... on 1 November, 1960

C/SCA/16885/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/12/2022 5.4) Relying upon the Explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Act, it was submitted that the said explanation clearly states that production of account books or other evidence from which material evidence could, with due diligence, have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure. It was submitted that the contention of the petitioner that the Assessing Officer could have asked for further details during the course of original scrutiny proceedings stands negated in view of Explanation 1 to Section 147 which does not exonerate the assessee from disclosing full and true material facts. It was submitted that the Apex court in the decision of Calcutta Discount (supra) has held that the assessee cannot contend that by disclosing certain evidence, he should be deemed to have disclosed other evidence, which might have been discovered by the Page 24 of 35 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 03:44:47 IST 2022 C/SCA/16885/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/12/2022 assessing authority if he had pursued investigation on the basis of what has been disclosed. It was submitted that the petitioner also does not dispute the fact that no agreements were produced with regard to guarantee commission payment to entities/individual except Moti Hira Land Developers. Therefore, there is a failure on part of the petitioner as to full and true disclosure, and the same can be clearly culled out from the reasons recorded. 5.5) With regard to the remaining three issues of reopening with regard to (i) Excess Payment of interest, (ii) Disallowance u/s 14A and (iii) Income reconciliation as per 26AS with regard to contract income, it was submitted that that there is no application of mind by the Assessing Officer on these three issues in the original assessment proceedings and therefore, concept of change Page 25 of 35 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 03:44:47 IST 2022 C/SCA/16885/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/12/2022 of opinion would not be applicable. It was therefore, submitted that the petition may be dismissed.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 1681 - K C Gupta - Full Document

Shri Dhruv Dipakbhai Panchal,, ... vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2),, ... on 15 July, 2019

2) In case of Dhruv Dipakbhai Panchal v. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(2)(2) reported in (2018) 93 taxmann.com 206 (Gujarat). 4.10) It was submitted that there is Page 19 of 35 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 03:44:47 IST 2022 C/SCA/16885/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/12/2022 nothing stated in the reasons recorded or from the material on record which suggest that the assessee failed to disclose truly and fully all material facts.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1