Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.23 seconds)Income Tax Rules, 1962
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Madho Properties Ltd. on 12 September, 1980
Recently, a Division Bench of this court consisting of D. K. Sen and C. K. Banerji JJ. has also expressed a similar view in CIT v. Madho Properties Ltd. (Income-tax Appeals Nos. 9 and 10 of 1976, disposed of on September 12, 1980) . Thus, it appears that this court has persistently taken the view that the presumption under Clause (b) of Section 269C(2) of the Act is not applicable to the stage when the competent authority forms his belief under Sub-section (1) of Section 269C, for, there is no proceeding at that stage.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 134A in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 269A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 269S in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 7 in The Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Mahavir Metal Works P. Ltd And Anr. vs Union Of India And Anr. on 19 December, 1973
11. Now, we may consider the decisions cited at the Bar. Mr. Balai Pal, learned counsel for the revenue, has placed reliance on a decision of the Delhi High Court in Mahavir Metal Works P. Ltd. v. Union of India . In that case, the competent authority before forming his belief got the property valued by a valuer. According to that valuation, the fair market value exceeded the stated value. It was observed that the presumption under Section 269C(2) that the consideration agreed to between the parties had not been truly stated in the instrument of transfer arose. It does not, however, appear that the point was specifically raised and argued in the case.