Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.17 seconds)
G.C. Sen Gupta vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 18 January, 1994 cites

K.P. Varghese vs The Income Tax Officer,Ernakulam, And ... on 4 September, 1981

3. Section 52(2) came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597. The court held that so far as material for the present purpose, Sub-section (2) of Section 52 could only be invoked only where the consideration for the transfer of a capital asset had been understated by the assessee, or, in other words, the full value of the consideration in respect of the transfer was shown at a lesser figure than that actually received by the assessee, and the burden of proving such understatement or concealment was on the Revenue. The court further observed that the sub-section had no application in the case of an honest and bona fide transaction where the consideration received by the assessee had been correctly declared or disclosed by him.
Supreme Court of India Cites 26 - Cited by 3460 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs Rajasthan Mines Ltd., Calcutta on 5 May, 1970

" It is well-settled that when a conclusion of a fact-finding body is based on an inference from primary facts, then the findings of fact are not amenable to challenge but the inferences drawn from the primary facts are open to challenge as a conclusion of law. It is also open to challenge the same on the ground that the conclusion of fact drawn by the Tribunal was not supported by legal evidence or that the impugned conclusion drawn from the fact was not rationally possible. In such a case, it is necessary to examine the correctness of the conclusion. Reliance may be placed on the decision of this court in CIT v. Rajasthan Mines [1970] 78 ITR 45 ; AIR 1970 SC 1560. This position is well-settled by many decisions of this court."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 28 - K S Hegde - Full Document
1