Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 29 (0.29 seconds)Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 139 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 153 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 143 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Indian Oil Corporation vs Income Tax Officer, Central Circle V, ... on 8 May, 1986
In Indian Oil Corporation vs. I.T.O. {(1986) 3 SCC 409}, the Supreme court indicated that section 147 (a) postulates a duty on every assessee, firstly to disclose facts; secondly, those which are material; thirdly, the disclosure must be full and fourthly, true. What facts are material and necessary for assessment, will differ from case to case.
Niranjan & Co. P. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, West ... on 19 March, 1986
14. Referring to the scope of operation of clauses (a) and (b) of section 147, the Supreme court held in Niranjan and Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. C.I.T {(1986) Supp. SCC 272} that reopening under section 147 can only be made after completed assessment if the Income Tax Officer has reason to believe under clause (a) that by reason of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to make a return or to disclose fully or truly all relevant facts, income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for that year. Reopening is also possible under clause (b) notwithstanding that there was no omission or failure on the part of the assessee, if the Income Tax Officer has in consequence of information in his possession, reason to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment.
M/S. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal And Another vs Income-Tax Officer And Another on 13 July, 1993
15. Dwelling on the circumstances under which the reopening may not amount to a mere change of opinion, the Supreme Court held in Phool Chand Bajrang Lal Vs. I.T.O. {(1993) 4 SCC 77} that the ITO may start reassessment proceedings either because some fresh facts come to light which were not previously disclosed or some information with regard to the facts previously disclosed comes into his possession which tends to expose the untruthfulness of those facts. In such situations, it is not a case of mere change of opinion or the drawing of a different inference from the same facts.