Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.87 seconds)Income Tax Rules, 1962
The Merged States (Laws) Act, 1949
Section 15 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Maharaja Shri Umaid Mills Ltd. vs Income-Tax Officer, Central Circle Iv, ... on 17 February, 1961
Mr. Kaka has invited our attention to Maharaja Shri Umaid Mills Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, Central Circle IV, New Delhi, which is a decision of the Punjab High Court, wherein a view has been taken that the disclosure of the figures relating to the sales in British India by the assessee was a sufficient disclosure of the primary facts for his assessment. In the present case, the facts disclosed go much further than the mere figures of the sales in British India and furnish adequate information of the necessary primary facts from which the Income-tax Officer could have easily drawn the necessary factual and legal inferences. In our opinion, therefore, Mr. Kaka's contention that the condition of section 34(1)(a) that the Income-tax Officer must have reason to believe that the under-assessment is due to a failure or omission on the part of the petitioner to disclose fully all the material facts necessary for its assessment is not satisfied in the present case and, consequently, the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to issue the notices, which have been challenged by the petitioner in the present petition.
Calcutta Discount Company Limited vs Income-Tax Officer, Companies ... on 1 November, 1960
In Calcutta Discount Co. v. Income-tax Officer, Calcutta, their Lordships of the Supreme Court pointed out :
Section 14 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in Income Tax Rules, 1962 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1