Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.26 seconds)Section 55 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
A. Gasper vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Calcutta on 21 August, 1991
5. The learned Single Judge, after considering the matter, observed that since the Calcutta High Court had taken different view from that taken by the Allahabad High Court and the same had been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of A Gasper v. CIT (1991) 192 ITR 382 (SC), the learned Single Judge found that the show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner in exercise of power under section 263 of the Act was not correct and he quashed that notice. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeal has been preferred by the revenue .
The Finance Act, 2018
Section 10 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Gulab Chand on 4 March, 1991
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. Apparently, both the decisions, i.e., the decision given by the Allahabad High Court in the case of Gulab Chand (supra) and that of the Calcutta High Court in the case of A Gasper (supra) are in conflict with each other.
B.K. Roy Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Ors. on 5 August, 1993
By the Court
This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge, by his order dated 5-8-1993 (reported as B.K. Roy (P) Ltd. v. CIT (1995) 211 ITR 500 (Cal), has quashed the show-cause notice issued by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by that order, the present appeal has been preferred.
1