Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.76 seconds)
Shree Venkateshwara Petro Chemicals vs The Assistant Commissioner Of on 15 April, 2010 cites

Agfa-Gavert India Limited vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 23 December, 1997

15 (2001) 123 STC 108 (Mad) Agfa-Gavert Limited Vs. State of Tamil Nadu ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:50:49 ::: *12* 16 (2006) 148 STC 419 (Mad) Sree Murugan Engineering Products Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Coimbatore 17 (1976) 38 STC 354 (Bom) Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Ramdas Laxmidas 18 28 STC 144 (Mysore) Karnataka Trading Co. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, II Circle, Bangalore.
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Income Tax Officer, Azamgarh & Anr vs Mewalal Dwarka Prasad & Vice Versa on 10 February, 1989

21 The Apex Court, in the matter of Income Tax Officer Vs. Mewalal Dwarka Prasad reported in 1989(176) ITR 529, held that if the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is found to be good in respect of one item, it cannot be quashed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground that it may not be valid in respect of some other items. The said ratio holds good even in this case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 37 - M Rangnath - Full Document

Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur vs Purushottam Das Bangur & Anr on 22 January, 1997

25 So far the submission made by Mr.Jetly that the Assessing Authority did not apply his mind independently is concerned, it appears that the vehicle numbers given by the ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:50:49 ::: *16* Petitioners on invoices were reported to be in respect of scooters, bikes, open delivery van, etc.. If this be so, the petroleum product cannot be transported from one place to another in such types of vehicles. One of the necessary ingredient for inter-State sale as mentioned in Section 3(a) of the CST Act, 1956 is the movement of goods from one State to another. In other words, the movement should be direct result of terms of the contract between two parties having their place of business within the same State or in another State. In the present case, if the material brought to the notice of the Assessing Authority is to be relied upon then it is rather not possible to move the goods from one State to another. On the basis of documents on record only the Assessing Authority could have had reason to believe that incorrect information was submitted with the return by the Petitioner-Assessee. The Apex Court, in the matter of Income Tax Officer, Jodhpur Vs. Purushottam Das Bangur and another reported in CDJ 1997 SC 1595, held that on the basis of information contained in the letter produced by the parties, the officer has reason to believe that the Assessee must have supplied incorrect information or produced incorrect documents. Paragraphs Nos.10 and 11 of the said judgment read thus:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 97 - Full Document
1   2 Next