Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.26 seconds)Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat I vs S.P. Bhatt on 8 March, 1973
15. Since the legal fiction arising from the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) has been clearly explained by the decision of this court in CIT v. S.P. Bhatt, with which we are in complete agreement, the question referred to us must be answered as follows :
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Madras vs M/S. Khoday Eswarsa & Sons on 22 September, 1971
In penalty proceedings, the decisions of the Supreme Court in Anwar Ali's case [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) and in Khoday Eswarsa's case [1972] 83 IT 369 (SC) have to be applied and in the light of those decisions, it is obvious that, in the instant case, the burden cast by the Explanation upon the assessee must be held to be discharged. That is the only inference which follows from the facts of this particular case.
Commissioner Of Income Tax West Bengal vs Anwar Ali on 29 April, 1970
In penalty proceedings, the decisions of the Supreme Court in Anwar Ali's case [1970] 76 ITR 696 (SC) and in Khoday Eswarsa's case [1972] 83 IT 369 (SC) have to be applied and in the light of those decisions, it is obvious that, in the instant case, the burden cast by the Explanation upon the assessee must be held to be discharged. That is the only inference which follows from the facts of this particular case.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs P.R. Seetharama Rao on 7 November, 1974
No such material exists so far as the record of this case is concerned and, hence, in our opinion, the decision in CIT v. P.R. Seetharama Rao [1976] 105 ITR 151 (Mad) cannot help the revenue.
Western Automobiles (India) vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... on 17 December, 1976
It may be pointed out that, in a case before the Bombay High Court in Western Automobiles (India) v. CIT [1978] 112 ITR 1048, the assessee concerned had admitted before the ITO that the amount was his income from business in the year in question. As pointed out by Desai J. speaking for the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at page 1056 :
Messrs. Lalchand Bhagat Ambical Ram vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bihar & ... on 14 May, 1959
The Tribunal followed the decision of the Punjab High Court in Gumani Ram iri Ram v. CIT [1972] 85 ITR 67, and did not follow the decision of the Delhi High Court in Durga Timber Work's case [1971] 79 ITR 63. The Tribunal, therefore, allowed the appeal of the assessee and set aside the judgment and order of the IAC levying the penalty. Thereafter, at the instance of the revenue, the questions hereinabove set out have been referred to us for our opinion.
The Income Tax Act, 1961
1