Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 33 (2.14 seconds)
Zinzuwadia And Sons vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 30 April, 2019 cites

M/S.Mdlr Resorts Pvt.Ltd. vs C.I.T.-Ii . on 15 April, 2014

16. Evidently therefore, the search had been conducted in the case of the petitioner at the locations stated in the authorisation. This court is in complete agreement with the view taken the Delhi High Court in MDLR Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of income Tax (supra), to the effect that the address at which search could be conducted would be the place or location, where books of accounts, documents, jewellery, unaccounted assets etc. could be located/found and Page 19 of 25 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 30 16:27:36 IST 2019 C/SCA/6135/2019 JUDGMENT it need not be the registered office/head office of the person concerned. Under the circumstances, the contention that no proceedings under section 153A of the Act could have been initiated against the petitioner does not merit acceptance.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Bansilal B. Raisoni And Sons vs Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 29 November, 2018

In this regard, reference may be made to the decision of the Bombay High Court in Bansilal B. Raisoni & Sons v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (supra), on which reliance has been placed by the learned advocate for the Page 16 of 25 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 30 16:27:36 IST 2019 C/SCA/6135/2019 JUDGMENT petitioner, wherein the court has prima facie found that there is no provision which would restrict the department's search action only to the registered office of a partnership firm. The court held that the conduct of search at these places in relation to the partnership firm and its business need to be examined in proper perspective keeping in mind the objections of the partnership firm and such exercise should be allowed to be done at the level of the Assessing Officer.
Bombay High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 3 - M S Sanklecha - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next