Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Author: tgzy

August undefined, 2024

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 …

Chittarmal, Moti vs State Of Rajasthan on 8 January, 2003 - Indian …

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 … Web(ITAT) Order on Bofors - The Hindu granola that is healthy

Delhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the …

Web15. In 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 … WebPunjab & Haryana H.C : Whether the Tribunal was correct in rejecting the assessee’s contention that the Explanation to s. 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, gives rise to a separate charge as distinguished from the substantive provisions of s. 271 (1 ) (c) and that the provisions of the main s. 271(1)(c) having not been specifically invoked, penalty cannot … WebBench: Mukharji, Sabyasachi (J) PETITIONER: CHUHARMAL S/O TAKARMAL MOHNANI Vs. RESPONDENT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, M.P., BHOPAL DATE OF … granola that drug tests

Principles of Cross Examination: Tool to be used during income tax

Understated Sale Value of Agricultural Land to avoid payment

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. WebCreating 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: chintzy star wars immersion blenderWebMar 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 ... chintzy word origin

"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 " - Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Chuharmal vs cit 1988 172 itr 250

Lakshmanan Chettiar And Anr. vs Chidambaram Chettiar And Ors.

Web217 Kms. Distance between Chennai to Chidambaram by Flight is. 197 Kms. Travel Time from Chennai to Chidambaram by Road is. 4:48 hrs. Nearest Airport in Chennai. … WebIn Chuharmal's case [1988] 172 ITR 250 (SC), the facts, briefly, were that in January, 1974, on the basis of the order passed by the Superintendent, Central Excise, Jagpur, dated …

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 … WebDec 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 …

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 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

WebMay 2, 1988 · Citation. 1988-LL-0502. Appellant Name. CHUHARMAL. Respondent Name. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. Court. SUPREME COURT. Relevant Act. 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 …

WebThe Revenue, to proceed against the assessee, must have definite information with regard to the assessee being in possession of monies or holding investment. This is in view of th

WebThe SC in case of CHUHARMAL VS. CIT ( 1988) 172 ITR 250, has held that the provisions of Evidence Act are not applicable to the income tax proceedings, merely means that the … granola\\u0027s cousin crossword clueWebGet free access to the complete judgment in Commissioner Of Income Tax v. India Sea Foods. on CaseMine. chin \u0026 associatesWebMay 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. chin \\u0026 ng communicationWebIn 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 ... chin \u0026 ng communicationWebMay 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 … chin \\u0026 wong dental clinicWebApr 6, 2024 · Chuharmal Vs CIT (1988) 172 ITR 250 Smt. Srilekha Banerjee and others vs CIT 1964 AIR 697 Rajendran & Ors vs. ACIT (2006) 204 CTR (Mad) 9 Hacienda Farms … chintzy traductionWebJun 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 … chin \u0026 todd 1995