Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.37 seconds)Section 54F in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 45 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
B.B. Sarkar vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 5 May, 1981
the assessee to disclose fully all material facts. It was further stated
that the return was subjected to scrutiny and the order was passed
after examining the attendant documents and the deduction u/s 54 of
the Act had been allowed. It was also stated that the assessment
framed was further subjected to the order of the CIT(A) dated
13.11.2006 and the order of the ITAT dated 28.08.2009. Therefore,
the reopening proceedings initiated was not on account of failure on
the part of the assessee to disclose fully all material facts and if there
was no failure on the part of the assessee, the claim of the AO could
be construed as change of opinion. It was further stated that the AO
was not justified in disallowing the deduction of Rs.24,09,500 u/s 54
of the Act by stating that the investment in residential house property
was in joint ownership of the assessee with her husband and that the
assessee was not the absolute owner of the said property. It was stated
that there was no restriction in section 54 of the Act that the amount
invested in the construction of a residential house should be single
ownership or absolute ownership of only one assessee. Reliance was
placed on the judgment of the Hon'
ble Calcutta High Court in the
case of B.B.Sarkar v. CIT [(1981) 132 ITR 150 (Cal.)]
The Commissioner Trade Tax U.P. Lucknow vs S/S Gurnam Singh on 6 January, 2010
(i) CIT v. Gurnam Singh [(2010) 327 ITR 278 (P&H)]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Chandanben Maganlal on 12 May, 1999
and the
judgment of the Hon'
ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v.
Chandanben Maganlal [(2000) 245 ITR 182 (Guj.)].
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs V. Natarajan on 15 February, 2006
(ii) CIT v. V.Natrajan[(2006) 287 ITR 271 (Mad.)]
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Ravinder Kumar Arora on 17 September, 2011
(iv) CIT v. Ravinder Kumar Arora [(2012) 342 ITR 38 (Del)]