Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.20 seconds)Section 80HHC in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 127 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
N.R. Paper And Board Limited And Ors. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 23 March, 1998
The aforesaid undisclosed income stands in direct contrast to the disclosed income. The former is the one which is not recorded in the books of accounts or other documents maintained in the normal course relating to such previous years. What flows from the aforesaid provisions is the fact that the assessment made under the aforesaid Chapter is in addition to the regular assessment proceedings undertaken under Chapter XIV of the Act. Thus as held by their Lordships of Gujarat High Court in the case of N.R. Paper & Board Ltd. & Ors. vs. Dy. CIT (supra) while the block assessment is for assessment of undisclosed income of block period, regular assessment is for assessment of total income of the year. Both are for different purposes and there is no double assessment. The AO is competent to proceed with regular assessment as well for framing assessment under s. 158BC of the Act. These are mutually exclusive.
Section 158B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Express Movers (P) Ltd. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 3 April, 1997
(3) Express Movers (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (1997) 59 TTJ (Del) 227 : (1997) 61 ITD 528 (Del);
L.R. Gupta And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 4 November, 1991
(4) L. R. Gupta & Ors. vs. Union of India (1992) 194 ITR 32 (Del); and
(5) Vijayashanthi Investments (P) Ltd. vs. Chief CIT (1991) 187 ITR 405 (AP).
Taylor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 April, 1992
In support reliance was placed on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Tailor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (1992) 198 ITR 1 (Del) and Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC), The learned Departmental Representative on the other hand, vehemently opposed the admission of the additional ground of appeal and submitted that as held in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. (supra), before additional ground of appeal could be admitted, it must be shown that the ground raised is bona fide and the same could not be raised earlier for the good reasons. Any and every ground of appeal cannot be admitted without satisfying the Court that there existed sufficient reasons for not raising the grounds before the lower authorities.