Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.43 seconds)Section 146 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 217 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 27 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 11 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 246 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Mauladin Ayub Firm vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... on 23 September, 1958
The mention of S. 144 has been made by the ITO after a thorough discussion in the assessment order and it is not a mistake of nomenclature as has been argued on behalf of the assessee. It is true that the plea regarding the alleged loss of the books were raised but the ITO did not accept the said plea. Whether the ITO was correct or not in not accepting the said plea could only be raised by filing a petition under S. 146 which the assessee chose not to file. As per decision of Bombay High Court in Mauladin Ayub Firm vs. CIT (supra) this issue could not be raised in quantum appeals. Here again the CIT(A) and my learned brother have stated that the assessee did not challenge the validity of assessments but only S. 144 under which the assessments were made. In this connection, I would mention provisions of Ss. 144 and 146 as under :