Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.30 seconds)
New Mount Trading & Investment Co. Ltd. vs Additional Commissioner Grade-I ... on 4 December, 2017 cites

M/S K. Raheja Development Corporation vs State Of Karnataka on 5 May, 2005

Then, as to the 'reason to believe' recorded by the assessing authority, learned Senior Advocate submits that there does not exist any 'reason' inasmuch as in the two judgments referred to by the assessing authority in the proposal made by him, namely K. Raheja Development Corporation (supra) and Larsen and Toubro (supra), the Supreme Court had specifically held that the question of deemed sale of construction material in such a transaction would arise only if the builder raise constructions on behalf of the another. Learned Senior Advocate submits that in so far as it is admitted that up to the Assessment Year 2010-11, petitioner had not received booking for a single residential flat/unit from any person and further in so far as there is no material to disbelieve the claim of the petitioner that till that time it was raising the constructions in question on its own account, it could never be said that any turnover had escaped assessment at the hands of the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2008-09 (U.P.).
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 73 - S N Variava - Full Document

The Commissioner Of Sales Tax, U.P vs M/S. Bhagwan Industries (P) Ltd. ... on 10 October, 1972

The phrase 'reason to believe' in the context of reassessment proceeding has been subject matter of interpretation by the Courts. The Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bhagwan Industries (P) Ltd., (1973) 31 STC 293 (SC) interpreted the phrase 'reason to believe' appearing in a similar provision in Section 21 of the U.P, Sales Tax Act, 1948 providing for reassessment thus:
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 49 - H R Khanna - Full Document

M.L. Shukla And Co. vs Income-Tax Officer on 13 January, 1983

This Court, in The General Electric Company of India Ltd. Vs The Sales Tax Officer, 1973 UPTC 386 and again in M.L.Shukla & Co. Vs The Sales Tax Officer, 1981 UPTC 396 had clearly laid down the law that a completed assessment can be reopened if there is material before the Sales Tax Officer that points towards escapement of turnover. Those cases had arisen under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. Even under that Act, a reassessment proceeding could be initiated by the assessing authority upon formation of a 'reason to believe' as required under the Act.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 21 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

M/S Larsen & Toubro Limited & Anr vs State Of Karnataka & Anr on 26 September, 2013

Then, as to the 'reason to believe' recorded by the assessing authority, learned Senior Advocate submits that there does not exist any 'reason' inasmuch as in the two judgments referred to by the assessing authority in the proposal made by him, namely K. Raheja Development Corporation (supra) and Larsen and Toubro (supra), the Supreme Court had specifically held that the question of deemed sale of construction material in such a transaction would arise only if the builder raise constructions on behalf of the another. Learned Senior Advocate submits that in so far as it is admitted that up to the Assessment Year 2010-11, petitioner had not received booking for a single residential flat/unit from any person and further in so far as there is no material to disbelieve the claim of the petitioner that till that time it was raising the constructions in question on its own account, it could never be said that any turnover had escaped assessment at the hands of the petitioner for the Assessment Year 2008-09 (U.P.).
Supreme Court of India Cites 50 - Cited by 107 - R M Lodha - Full Document
1   2 Next