Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.55 seconds)Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs Kanpur Coal Syndicate on 30 April, 1964
Reliance was placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate, which I have already referred to. The Supreme Court repelled that contention and it was held that it was not a case of election between two alternative units of assessment but an attempt to bring to tax the income of an assessable entity which had escaped assessment. Subba Rao J. (as he then was) observed as follows:
Section 14 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Murlidhar Jhawar And Purna Ginning & ... on 4 March, 1962
In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Murlidhar Jhawar and Purna Ginning and Pressing Factory, referred to above, it was held that the partners of an unregistered, firm might be assessed individually or they might be assessed collectively in the status of an unregistered firm but the Income-tax Officer could not assess the one income twice, once in the hands of the partners and again in the hands of the unregistered firm. That was also a case in which the charging section was Section 3 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.