Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.40 seconds)

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. vs Income-Tax Officer And Ors. on 17 December, 1997

7. We feel that the observations of the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision clearly apply to the case at hand. Merely because the Assessing Officer felt that the issue required „much deeper scrutiny‟, is not ground enough for invoking Section 147. It is not belief per se that is a pre-condition for invoking Section 147 of the said Act but a belief founded on reasons. The expression used in Section 147 is - "If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe" and not - "If the Assessing Officer believes". There must be some basis upon which the belief can be built. It does not matter whether the belief is ultimately proved right or wrong, but, there must be some material upon which such a belief can be founded. In the present case, the ITA 109/08 Page 7 of 10 Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have found as a fact that there was no material upon which the Assessing Officer could have based his belief that income had escaped assessment. The decisions cited by Mr Jolly, who appeared on behalf of the revenue, namely, Income-tax Officer v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd: 217 ITR 597, Raymond Woolen Mills Limited v. Income-tax Officer and Others: 236 ITR 34 and Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd: 291 ITR 500 do not say anything different.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 717 - Full Document

Chhugamal Rajpal vs S. P. Chaliha & Ors on 21 January, 1971

Consequently, the tribunal, after considering various decisions, including the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Chhugamal Rajpal v. S.P. Chaliha & Others: 79 ITR 603 (SC), dismissed the appeal of the revenue and affirmed the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) saying that the initiation of ITA 109/08 Page 4 of 10 the proceedings under Section 147 and issuance of notice under Section 148 were without jurisdiction and were illegal. The assessment framed by the Assessing Officer on 31.03.2002 was also annulled.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 350 - K S Hegde - Full Document

Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd on 23 May, 2007

7. We feel that the observations of the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision clearly apply to the case at hand. Merely because the Assessing Officer felt that the issue required „much deeper scrutiny‟, is not ground enough for invoking Section 147. It is not belief per se that is a pre-condition for invoking Section 147 of the said Act but a belief founded on reasons. The expression used in Section 147 is - "If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe" and not - "If the Assessing Officer believes". There must be some basis upon which the belief can be built. It does not matter whether the belief is ultimately proved right or wrong, but, there must be some material upon which such a belief can be founded. In the present case, the ITA 109/08 Page 7 of 10 Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have found as a fact that there was no material upon which the Assessing Officer could have based his belief that income had escaped assessment. The decisions cited by Mr Jolly, who appeared on behalf of the revenue, namely, Income-tax Officer v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd: 217 ITR 597, Raymond Woolen Mills Limited v. Income-tax Officer and Others: 236 ITR 34 and Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd: 291 ITR 500 do not say anything different.
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 514 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Income-Tax Officer, Calcutta vs M/S. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. ... on 29 March, 1995

7. We feel that the observations of the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision clearly apply to the case at hand. Merely because the Assessing Officer felt that the issue required „much deeper scrutiny‟, is not ground enough for invoking Section 147. It is not belief per se that is a pre-condition for invoking Section 147 of the said Act but a belief founded on reasons. The expression used in Section 147 is - "If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe" and not - "If the Assessing Officer believes". There must be some basis upon which the belief can be built. It does not matter whether the belief is ultimately proved right or wrong, but, there must be some material upon which such a belief can be founded. In the present case, the ITA 109/08 Page 7 of 10 Commissioner Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have found as a fact that there was no material upon which the Assessing Officer could have based his belief that income had escaped assessment. The decisions cited by Mr Jolly, who appeared on behalf of the revenue, namely, Income-tax Officer v. Selected Dalurband Coal Co. Pvt. Ltd: 217 ITR 597, Raymond Woolen Mills Limited v. Income-tax Officer and Others: 236 ITR 34 and Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd: 291 ITR 500 do not say anything different.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 124 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1