Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.29 seconds)Income Tax Officer, I Ward, Dist, Vi, ... vs Lakhmani Mewal Das on 30 March, 1976
3. It is not necessary to enter into any detailed discussion on the point involved as the same stands squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in ITO v. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 and of this court in Jai Singh v. CIT [1982] 136 ITR 895. In both these cases, on identical facts, it was held that there was no reason for the assessing authority to believe that the assessee had failed to disclose fully
and truly all the material facts necessary for the assessment.
Jai Singh vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 16 February, 1982
This decision was duly considered in Jai Singh's case [1-982] 136 ITR 895 (P & H) and found to be distinguishable inasmuch as in the former case, the alleged name-lender had given a statement that he never advanced the loan in dispute to the assessee.
Kirpa Ram Ramji Dass vs Income-Tax Officer, A-Ward And Anr. on 20 November, 1979
In the present case also, no such statement was made by the creditors and as such the decision in Kirpa Ram Ramji Dass' case [1982] 135 ITR 68 (P & H) is of no avail to the Revenue.
Section 256 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
1