claimed to have been paid by the assessee, one Mr. M.K. Meattle is the common Managing Director. After the assessments were complete ... were initiated and the statement of one Mr M.K. Meattle who as stated above are the common MD of the three companies referred
assessee company
in cash.
3. The statement of Mr. M.K. Meattle, Managing Director of the
above three companies was recorded ... statement Mr. M.K. Meattle informed the Assessing Officer that
commission paid to M/s Roger Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. by the three
companies were havala
Wealth-Tax Officer vs Smt. Shanti Devi Meattle on 12 May, 1987
Equivalent citations: [1987]22ITD1(DELHI)
ORDER
U.S. Dhusia, Judicial Member
described in para 6
of order of CIT(A). M/s Saumya Meattle is only the beneficial owner of the
shares but not registered owner ... assessee company was
holding 30,470 shares onbehalf of M/s Saumya Meattle, who
was the beneficial owner of the shares and share holding
decision of Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CWT vs. Meattles (P) Ltd. (1985) 156 ITR 569 (Del), wherein it was held that
Meattles (P) Ltd., 156 ITR 569;
iii) CIT vs. Mrs. V. Chandra , 245 ITR 619;
iv) Director of Inspection of Income-tax (Inv.) vs. Pooran
Jagan Nath Sayal vs Assistant Commissioner Of Gift-Tax on 8 November, 1999
Equivalent citations
Dabur Invest Corp, New Delhi vs Prcit-16, New Delhi on 11 March, 2019
1
Karthikeyan 201 ITR 866 (SC)
19. CIT Vs. Smt. Shanti Meattle 90 ITR 385 (Alld.)
20. CIT Vs. Avinash Parvicha ... Allahabad High
Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Shanti Meattle 90 ITR 385 (All). He
submitted that the payment is in the nature
Karthikeyan 201 ITR 866 (SC)
19. CIT Vs. Smt. Shanti Meattle 90 ITR 385 (Alld.)
20. CIT Vs. Avinash Parvicha ... Allahabad High
Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Shanti Meattle 90 ITR 385 (All). He
submitted that the payment is in the nature
