Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 36 (0.36 seconds)Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
M/S. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal And Another vs Income-Tax Officer And Another on 13 July, 1993
In the case of Phool Chand
Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO [203 ITR 456] (supra), the facts indicate that
the AO at Azamgarh has received confidential communication from
ITO, Companies Distt. III P/7, Chowringhee Square, Calcutta that
certain transactions with M/s. Jain Finance Distributors (India)
Private Ltd, were admitted to be bogus and the company lent its
name to enable different parties to bring into their books, black
money under the guise of the loan from the said company. After
receipt of that information, the ITO at Azamgarh, not only
confronted assessee with the communication but also summoning
the Directors of the said company, examined them, offered for
cross-examination and then completed the assessment. In those
facts of the case, when there is a challenge for reopening of the
assessment Hon'ble Court has held as under:
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Amarjeet Singh (Huf) on 22 August, 2014
6. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shri Amarjeet Singh (HUF)
(IT Appeal No. 264 of 2005 dt. 22-08-2014);
Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv vs M/S Insecticides (India) Ltd. on 20 May, 2013
9. CIT Vs. Insecticides (India) Ltd., [357 ITR 330] (Delhi);
M/S Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax Iv & ... on 3 November, 2008
10. Haryana Acrylic Manufacturing Co. Vs. CIT [308 ITR 38];
Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs The Chiief Election Commissioner, New ... on 2 December, 1977
11. Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr Vs. The Chief Election
Commissioner, New Delhi and ors reported in 1978(1) SCC
405;
Income Tax Officer, I Ward, Dist, Vi, ... vs Lakhmani Mewal Das on 30 March, 1976
In the case of Phool Chand
Bajrang Lal Vs. ITO [203 ITR 456] (supra), the facts indicate that
the AO at Azamgarh has received confidential communication from
ITO, Companies Distt. III P/7, Chowringhee Square, Calcutta that
certain transactions with M/s. Jain Finance Distributors (India)
Private Ltd, were admitted to be bogus and the company lent its
name to enable different parties to bring into their books, black
money under the guise of the loan from the said company. After
receipt of that information, the ITO at Azamgarh, not only
confronted assessee with the communication but also summoning
the Directors of the said company, examined them, offered for
cross-examination and then completed the assessment. In those
facts of the case, when there is a challenge for reopening of the
assessment Hon'ble Court has held as under:
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi-Xi vs Batra Bhatta Company on 8 August, 2008
15. CIT Vs. Batra Bhatta & Co., [174 Taxman 444 (Del)];
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Pradeep Kumar Gupta [Along With Ita No. ... on 30 November, 2006
18. CIT Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta [303 ITR 95];