Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Author: khzf

August undefined, 2024

WebGet free access to the complete judgment in Commissioner Of Income Tax v. India Sea Foods. on CaseMine. WebWajid Ali Khan vs Puran Singh And Ors. on 11 July, 1924. Citedby 3 docs Sitaram Reddy vs Chinna Ram Reddy And Ors. on 16 April, 1958. Janabai Ammal vs T.A.S. Palani …

Punjab & Haryana H.C : Whether the Tribunal was correct in …

WebMay 19, 2024 · In the case of Chuharmal, the Apex Court held that the wrist watches in possession of assessee which were seized during search proceedings under the Customs Act, represented concealed income of the assessee. WebIn Chuharmal vs. CIT, [1988] 172 ITR 250, some wrist watches were seized from the bedroom of the assessee. The Department found that the assessee was the owner of the wrist watches and the High Court relied upon Section 110 of the Evidence Act which stipulates that when the question is whether any person is the dictionary\\u0027s r4

D. Manmohan VP – itatonline.org

WebA similar question arose before the Supreme Court in Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 70 CTR (SC) 88 : (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC), and while affirming the view of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the aforesaid view was taken and the matter was decided against the assessee. WebJan 4, 2013 · The principle involved, as explained by the apex court in the case of Chuharmal v. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC), referring to section 110 of the Indian … WebMar 19, 2024 · It is necessary, therefore, to understand the importance and scope of the principles of cross examination in income tax proceedings. The Supreme Court in the … dictionary\u0027s r5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT …

ITAT Explains Imp Law On Black Money Assessment In Hasan Ali …

WebMar 12, 2016 · The expression ‘income’ under the Act, a term of wide import, is applicable to section 69A, among others, of the Act (refer: Chuharmal vs. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 … WebDelhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty under s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, to the extent it was levied by reference to the addition of Rs. 19,000 made in the assessment? dictionary\u0027s r6WebCreating your profile on CaseMine allows you to build your network with fellow lawyers and prospective clients. Once you create your profile, you will be able to: city expo helsingborg

"WebAll groups and messages ... ... " - Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

India Legal Center: INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES ARE NOT STRICTLY …

WebApr 5, 2024 · Shanta Devi vs CIT (1988) 171 ITR 532 (P&H) Where Account books of partnership firm cannot be considered to be assessee- partner’s own book of account and cash credit found therein cannot be charged to tax as assessee-partner’s income u/s 68. WebGet free access to the complete judgment in Chandra Kala Sharma v. Ito on CaseMine.

Did you know?

WebMar 12, 2016 · The expression ‘income’ under the Act, a term of wide import, is applicable to section 69A, among others, of the Act (refer: Chuharmal vs. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC)). The assessee, claiming to have no foreign bank accounts, concedes subsequently (on the basis of a report by UBS AG, Zurich – which has been taken as part of the record) to ... WebSupreme Court Of India Chuharmal vs. CIT Sections 69A, 271(1)(c) Expln. Asst. Year 1974-75 Sabyasachi Mukharji & S. Ranganathan, JJ. Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 1863 of 1986

WebAnnammal And Ors. vs Chellakutti on 31 July, 1962. Equivalent citations: AIR 1963 Mad 300, (1963) IMLJ 154. Author: R Iyer. Bench: S R Iyer, K Kutti. JUDGMENT … WebGet free access to the complete judgment in M/s. Intime Credit & Holding Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi on CaseMine.

WebIn Ashok Kumar vs. CIT (1986) 53 CTR (MP) 226 : (1986) 160 ITR 497 (MP), the question that arose for decision was whether the Tribunal was justified in refusing to accept the assesseeâ€™s explanation given in respect of cash amounting to Rs. 16,000. ... In Chuharmal vs. CIT (1988) 70 CTR (SC) 88 : (1988) 172 ITR 250 (SC), some wrist ... WebBench: Mukharji, Sabyasachi (J) PETITIONER: CHUHARMAL S/O TAKARMAL MOHNANI Vs. RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, M.P., BHOPAL DATE OF …

WebJul 25, 2003 · Citation: 2003-LL-0725-5: Appellant Name: ANANDILAL: Respondent Name: ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX: Court: ITAT: Relevant Act: Income-tax: Date of Order: 25/07/2003

WebJun 30, 2024 · Attention is invited to the decision of Chuharmal v. CIT (1988) 172 !TR 250 (SC) where it was held that the Evidence Act does not apply to proceedings under the … city explorer pass websiteWebOn the other hand counsel for the State submitted, relying upon the decision of this Court in Willie (William) Slaney vs. State of Madhya Paradesh AIR 1956 SC 116 and State of … city exportWebOct 8, 2024 · The expression ‘income’ under the Act, a term of wide import, is applicable to section 69A, among others, of the Act (refer: Chuharmal vs. CIT [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC)). dictionary\u0027s r8WebMay 30, 2024 · CHUHARMAL V. CIT, 2 May, 1988. 1988 AIR 1384, 1988 SCR (3) 788 and 172 ITR 250 . Section 110 of the Evidence Act provides that where a person was found … dictionary\u0027s r7WebMay 2, 1988 · Citation. 1988-LL-0502. Appellant Name. CHUHARMAL. Respondent Name. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. Court. SUPREME COURT. Relevant Act. dictionary\\u0027s r7 dictionary\\u0027s r8WebDec 15, 2010 · As rightly pointed out by the assessee even before the ld. CIT (A), the fact of the assessee becoming a major on 7.1.2000 is borne out by the assessees date of birth, which finds mention in the return of income in Form 2B … dictionary\\u0027s r9