Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 20 (0.23 seconds)
Cliftons Pearson Export & Agencies Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 13 August, 1996 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras vs V. Mr. P. Firm, Muar on 26 October, 1964

In terms of jurisdictional (Calcutta) High Court's decision in the case of CIT v. Janata Film Exchange (P.) Ltd. [1993] 202 ITR 532 also it is presumed that the ITO, Calcutta has treated the return of income filed with him as withdrawn by the assessee and, therefore, the ITO is deprived of the jurisdiction over this case. In other words, the assessment made by the Assessing Officer, Calcutta on the basis of the return of income treated to have been withdrawn and transferred to ITO, Kanpur is without jurisdiction and is illegal. Once the return of income is withdrawn by the assessee and is treated by the department to have been withdrawn it becomes non est in the eyes of law and any assessment made on such return being non est is bound to be null and void.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 235 - Full Document

Joginder Singh vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. on 9 January, 1980

22. In view of these facts and legal position all other contentions and arguments raised by Sri S. Prakash, the learned D.R. are rejected as in our opinion, neither they are relevant nor tenable. Thus, in view of the above discussion as the provisions of section 124(4) which are mandatory are violated and the objection of the assessee regarding question of jurisdiction was not decided by the Commissioners concerned or by the Board, in our view the assessment order under section 144/251, dated 20-3-1990 is vitiated. Our view gets due support from the Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in the case of Joginder Singh v. CIT [1981] 128 ITR 14 wherein it was held as under :-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Income-Tax Officer, A-Ward, Agra, And ... vs Firm Madan Mohan Damma Mal And Another. on 10 January, 1968

23. The question of fresh assessment order does not arise in this case as the first assessment has already been made by the ITO, Kanpur and the same has not been cancelled or set aside by the CIT, Kanpur. That assessment, therefore, has become final from all angles. Then the Allahabad High Court decision in the case of ITO v. Firm Madan Mohan Damma Mal [1968] 70 ITR 293 also supports the view taken by us. While commenting on the sub-section (6) of section 124 of the Act, the Hon'ble High Court has observed as under at page 299 :-
Allahabad High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 28 - Full Document
1   2 Next