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 … 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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI SUBJECT : …

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 … WebJan 18, 2024 · The ld. CIT (A) in the case of Shri Mohinder Singh (seller) observed that he had received a sale consideration of Rs 2,46,30,000/- from the sale of his agricultural land from Shri Malkiat Singh, whereas, the sale deed was executed at much lesser rate. floating wall microwave shelf

K.P Zeenath, Calicut v. ACIT, Calicut Income Tax Appellate …

WebJul 11, 2010 · However, the court also clarified later, in Chuharmal vs CIT (172 ITR 250 at 255 SC), that when the taxing authorities are desirous of invoking the principles of the Evidence Act in proceedings before them, they are not prevented from doing so. 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. 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 floating wall media storage