17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT

88 ITR 53Supreme Court of India1973#18372 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2018.

Judgments citing 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 583/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…eless No. 1, viz., the source whence the purchase money came, is by far the most important test for determining whether the sale standing in the name of one person, is in reality for the benefit of another." 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 53 (SC), relying on the decision in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it was laid down that a finding on the point as to whether a purchase was made benami or not, would be a finding of fact and if it is based upon some evidence, then such a finding cannot be interfered with by the High Court in a reference, The finding of benami…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 582/KOL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…eless No. 1, viz., the source whence the purchase money came, is by far the most important test for determining whether the sale standing in the name of one person, is in reality for the benefit of another." 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 53 (SC), relying on the decision in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it was laid down that a finding on the point as to whether a purchase was made benami or not, would be a finding of fact and if it is based upon some evidence, then such a finding cannot be interfered with by the High Court in a reference, The finding of benami…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 581/KOL/2016[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…eless No. 1, viz., the source whence the purchase money came, is by far the most important test for determining whether the sale standing in the name of one person, is in reality for the benefit of another." 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 53 (SC), relying on the decision in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it was laid down that a finding on the point as to whether a purchase was made benami or not, would be a finding of fact and if it is based upon some evidence, then such a finding cannot be interfered with by the High Court in a reference, The finding of benami…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 580/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…eless No. 1, viz., the source whence the purchase money came, is by far the most important test for determining whether the sale standing in the name of one person, is in reality for the benefit of another." 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 53 (SC), relying on the decision in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it was laid down that a finding on the point as to whether a purchase was made benami or not, would be a finding of fact and if it is based upon some evidence, then such a finding cannot be interfered with by the High Court in a reference, The finding of benami…

Sri Sudipta Ghosh, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-15, Kolkata

In the result, I.T.A. No. 583/Kol/2016, Assessment Year: 2007-08, is allowed in part

ITA 579/KOL/2016[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble]

Section 143(3)Section 250

…eless No. 1, viz., the source whence the purchase money came, is by far the most important test for determining whether the sale standing in the name of one person, is in reality for the benefit of another." 17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT [1973] 88 ITR 53 (SC), relying on the decision in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 31 ITR 28 (SC), it was laid down that a finding on the point as to whether a purchase was made benami or not, would be a finding of fact and if it is based upon some evidence, then such a finding cannot be interfered with by the High Court in a reference, The finding of benami…

17. In Rai Bahadur Mohan Singh Oberoi v. CIT (88 ITR 53) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax