Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)
D. K. B. & Co. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax. (Cit V. D. ... on 25 November, 1997 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Shri Pawan Kumar Dalmia on 23 June, 1987

In CIT vs. Pawan Kumar Dalmia (supra), a Division Bench of this Court held that the presumption under the Expln. to s. 271(1)(c) can be displaced by the assessee proving that the failure to return the correct income did not arise from any fraud or gross or wilful neglect and the quantum of proof necessary would be that required in a civil case, namely, preponderance of probabilities.
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 41 - K S Paripoornan - Full Document

C.I.T. (Central) Calcutta vs Daulat Ram Rawatmull on 12 September, 1972

5. The decision of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Daulat Ram Rawatmull (1973) 87 ITR 349 (SC) was rightly distinguished by the Tribunal. The contention is that since the fixed deposits were utilised for raising a loan, it would show that the deposits were of Mr. Bharathan. But in the light of the overwhelming contra-evidence, the fact of raising loan would not alter the situation or would improve the case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 454 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax ... vs Jeevan Lal Sah on 16 September, 1993

13. The Supreme Court in Addl. CIT vs. Jeevan Lal Sah (1994) 205 ITR 244 (SC) has held that the rule regarding the burden of proof enunciated in CIT vs. Anwar Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC) is no longer valid. The Expln. to s. 271(1)(c) shifts the burden to the assessee and if he fails to establish the same, the presumption will become a finding and it would be open to the authority to levy the penalty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 154 - B P Reddy - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax West Bengal vs Anwar Ali on 29 April, 1970

13. The Supreme Court in Addl. CIT vs. Jeevan Lal Sah (1994) 205 ITR 244 (SC) has held that the rule regarding the burden of proof enunciated in CIT vs. Anwar Ali (1970) 76 ITR 696 (SC) is no longer valid. The Expln. to s. 271(1)(c) shifts the burden to the assessee and if he fails to establish the same, the presumption will become a finding and it would be open to the authority to levy the penalty.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 577 - A N Grover - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax Kerala, ... vs V. Damodaran, Trivandrum on 15 October, 1979

In CIT vs. Damodaran (1980) 121 ITR 572 (SC) the Supreme Court had taken the view that it is not open to the respondent on an application filed by the Department, to raise a question which was neither raised before the authorities below nor it was considered. If the assessee was really aggrieved, he should have asked for a reference on that question.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 77 - R S Pathak - Full Document
1