Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.40 seconds)

M/S. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal And Another vs Income-Tax Officer And Another on 13 July, 1993

10. On the basis of the aforesaid judgment in M/s.Phool Chand Bajrang Lal (supra), she submits that if the assessing officer comes in possession of any document and material, which was not considered while finalising the assessment orders, that would itself be sufficient for re-opening the assessments earlier completed. In this case, the Circular was not considered by the earlier assessing officer at the time of completing the assessment orders and, therefore, the decision to WP(C)s 14875 & 15023/22 12 re-open the assessments had been taken, which is not liable to be interfered with. She further submits that once the assessment orders have been passed, the remedy of the petitioner is to challenge those orders before the appellate authority and not before this Court to interfere with the assessment orders.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 508 - S C Agrawal - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax 5 Mumbai vs M/S. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. Through ... on 31 January, 2018

17. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, prescribing the methodology for determining the amount of the expenditure in addition to income not includible in total income, was inserted with effect from 24.3.2008 to implement sub-Sections (2) and (3) of Section 14A. It is a clear indicator that a new method for computing the expenditure was brought in by the Rules, which was to be utilised for computing the expenditure for the assessment years 2007-08 and onwards, as held in CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. [(2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC)].
Supreme Court of India Cites 31 - Cited by 103 - A Bhushan - Full Document
1   2 Next