Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Mrs. Gladys S. Koder vs Income-Tax Officer, A-Ward on 6 January, 1974
Same view has been taken by Calcutta High Court in Rajinder Mohan Bhandari v. ITO and by Kerala High Court in Mrs. Gladys S. Koder v. ITO . In view of these circumstances, we uphold the order of CIT(A).
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, New Delhi vs Rao Thakur Narayan Singh on 30 October, 1964
9. No doubt, placing reliance on several authorities such as CIT v. Rao Thakur Narayan Singh , CIT v. H. Hoick Larsen , Hum Boldt Wedag India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO , learned Counsel for the appellant made attempt to assail the impugned notice but in our view, we cannot accept his submission. Law laid down in these cases is distinguishable on fact of this case and hence, these decisions with respect have no application/First facts and then authorities.
Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bombay vs H. Holck Larsen on 8 May, 1986
9. No doubt, placing reliance on several authorities such as CIT v. Rao Thakur Narayan Singh , CIT v. H. Hoick Larsen , Hum Boldt Wedag India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO , learned Counsel for the appellant made attempt to assail the impugned notice but in our view, we cannot accept his submission. Law laid down in these cases is distinguishable on fact of this case and hence, these decisions with respect have no application/First facts and then authorities.
Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd vs Income Tax Officer, Circle-1, Ward 'A', ... on 16 November, 1976
9. No doubt, placing reliance on several authorities such as CIT v. Rao Thakur Narayan Singh , CIT v. H. Hoick Larsen , Hum Boldt Wedag India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO , learned Counsel for the appellant made attempt to assail the impugned notice but in our view, we cannot accept his submission. Law laid down in these cases is distinguishable on fact of this case and hence, these decisions with respect have no application/First facts and then authorities.
Ram Narain Laxman Prasad vs Income-Tax Officer, "D" Ward And Ors. on 20 May, 1971
'Ram Prasad v. ITO (1995) 82 Taxman 199 (All). In this case, on p. 205, Allahabad High Court has observed as under :
Section 260A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Rajinder Mohan Bhandari vs Income-Tax Officer And Ors. on 24 February, 1976
Same view has been taken by Calcutta High Court in Rajinder Mohan Bhandari v. ITO and by Kerala High Court in Mrs. Gladys S. Koder v. ITO . In view of these circumstances, we uphold the order of CIT(A).
Hum Boldt Wedag India Ltd. And Ors. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... on 23 May, 1997
9. No doubt, placing reliance on several authorities such as CIT v. Rao Thakur Narayan Singh , CIT v. H. Hoick Larsen , Hum Boldt Wedag India Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT and Parashuram Pottery Works Co. Ltd. v. ITO , learned Counsel for the appellant made attempt to assail the impugned notice but in our view, we cannot accept his submission. Law laid down in these cases is distinguishable on fact of this case and hence, these decisions with respect have no application/First facts and then authorities.
1