Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.29 seconds)Section 148 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 153D in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 132A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 153A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 147 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 144A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Calcutta Discount Company Limited vs Income-Tax Officer, Companies ... on 1 November, 1960
18. Further, this Court in the case of Central India Electric Supply
\
Co. Ltd. v. ITO [2011 SCC OnLine Del 472] has taken a view that
merely rubber stamping of "Yes" would suggest that the decision
was taken in a mechanical manner. Paragraph 19 of the said
decision is reproduced as under:--
Union Of India vs Mohan Lal Capoor & Others on 26 September, 1973
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 16/08/2024 at 21:39:37
by an Under Secretary underneath a stamped Yes
against the column which queried as to whether the
approval of the Board had been taken. Rubber
stamping of underlying material is hardly a process
which can get the imprimatur of this court as it
suggests that the decision has been taken in a
mechanical manner. Even if the reasoning set out by
the Income-tax Officer was to be agreed upon, the least
which is expected is that an appropriate endorsement is
made in this behalf setting out brief reasons. Reasons
are the link between the material placed on record and the
conclusion reached by an authority in respect of an issue,
since they help in discerning the manner in which
conclusion is reached by the concerned authority. Our
opinion is fortified by the decision of the apex court
in Union of India v. M.L. Capoor, (1973) 2 SCC 836 : AIR
1974 SC 87, 97 wherein it was observed as under: