CWT v. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE

103 ITR 536Supreme Court of India1976#7193 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

section 153a(b)section 292c(1)section 153c(1)section 132(4a)section 22section 292csection 292loose papersdocuments seizedsatisfaction notesection 29section 153d

Judgments citing CWT v. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE

M/S KHEMKA STUART LEISURE LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6376/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Acit, M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-9, C/O- Bgjc & Associates, Raj New Delhi Tower, G-1, Alaknanda Community Centre, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Central Circle-18, Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Sohna Technobuild Central Circle-18, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aakcs8148N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

…“belonging” used for such a third party could be held as having ownership of the corresponding seized documents as follows: - “9.2 Further, the term ‘belonging to’ has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Bishwanath Chatterjee (103 ITR 536) and late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan (162 ITR 888) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The apex court in the case of Bishwanath Chattejee [1976] 103 ITR 536 (page 539): "The expression 'belong' has been defined as follows in the Oxford English Dictionary :—'To be the property or rightful possession of.' So it is the property of a…

M/S KHEMKA STUART LEISURE LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6375/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Acit, M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-9, C/O- Bgjc & Associates, Raj New Delhi Tower, G-1, Alaknanda Community Centre, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Central Circle-18, Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Sohna Technobuild Central Circle-18, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aakcs8148N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

…“belonging” used for such a third party could be held as having ownership of the corresponding seized documents as follows: - “9.2 Further, the term ‘belonging to’ has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Bishwanath Chatterjee (103 ITR 536) and late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan (162 ITR 888) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The apex court in the case of Bishwanath Chattejee [1976] 103 ITR 536 (page 539): "The expression 'belong' has been defined as follows in the Oxford English Dictionary :—'To be the property or rightful possession of.' So it is the property of a…

M/S SNEREA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 6330/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Acit, M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-9, C/O- Bgjc & Associates, Raj New Delhi Tower, G-1, Alaknanda Community Centre, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Central Circle-18, Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Sohna Technobuild Central Circle-18, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aakcs8148N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

…“belonging” used for such a third party could be held as having ownership of the corresponding seized documents as follows: - “9.2 Further, the term ‘belonging to’ has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Bishwanath Chatterjee (103 ITR 536) and late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan (162 ITR 888) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The apex court in the case of Bishwanath Chattejee [1976] 103 ITR 536 (page 539): "The expression 'belong' has been defined as follows in the Oxford English Dictionary :—'To be the property or rightful possession of.' So it is the property of a…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SNEREA DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 6237/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2007-08 Vs. Acit, M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-9, C/O- Bgjc & Associates, Raj New Delhi Tower, G-1, Alaknanda Community Centre, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2007-08 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Snerea Developers Pvt. Central Circle-18, Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aajcs5849K (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2010-11 Vs. M/S. Dcit, Sohna Technobuild Central Circle-18, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 301, Bakshi House, 40-41, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aakcs8148N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 153C(1)

…“belonging” used for such a third party could be held as having ownership of the corresponding seized documents as follows: - “9.2 Further, the term ‘belonging to’ has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Bishwanath Chatterjee (103 ITR 536) and late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan (162 ITR 888) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The apex court in the case of Bishwanath Chattejee [1976] 103 ITR 536 (page 539): "The expression 'belong' has been defined as follows in the Oxford English Dictionary :—'To be the property or rightful possession of.' So it is the property of a…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. SMT URMILA CHANDULAL PATEL, NEW DELHI

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1459/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…hese documents, do not at all belong to assessee and belongs only to Rahul Gautam (Sheela Foam) as well as Owned by Rahul Gautam Group o The definition of ―belong‘' and its meaning stands cleared from following case laws:- CWT VS. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) The expression ‗belong‘ means ‗to be the property or rightful possession of. So it is the property of a person, or that which is in his possession as of right which is liable to wealth tax. In other words, the liability to Wealth Tctx arises out of ownership of the assets, and not otherwise. CIT VS. MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. 221 TAXMAN 25 (GUJ.…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. KRISH PATEL, NEW DELHI

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1458/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…hese documents, do not at all belong to assessee and belongs only to Rahul Gautam (Sheela Foam) as well as Owned by Rahul Gautam Group o The definition of ―belong‘' and its meaning stands cleared from following case laws:- CWT VS. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) The expression ‗belong‘ means ‗to be the property or rightful possession of. So it is the property of a person, or that which is in his possession as of right which is liable to wealth tax. In other words, the liability to Wealth Tctx arises out of ownership of the assets, and not otherwise. CIT VS. MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. 221 TAXMAN 25 (GUJ.…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. PRADUMAN PATEL, NEW DELHI

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1457/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…hese documents, do not at all belong to assessee and belongs only to Rahul Gautam (Sheela Foam) as well as Owned by Rahul Gautam Group o The definition of ―belong‘' and its meaning stands cleared from following case laws:- CWT VS. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) The expression ‗belong‘ means ‗to be the property or rightful possession of. So it is the property of a person, or that which is in his possession as of right which is liable to wealth tax. In other words, the liability to Wealth Tctx arises out of ownership of the assets, and not otherwise. CIT VS. MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. 221 TAXMAN 25 (GUJ.…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. HIMANSHU PATEL, NEW DELHI

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1456/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…hese documents, do not at all belong to assessee and belongs only to Rahul Gautam (Sheela Foam) as well as Owned by Rahul Gautam Group o The definition of ―belong‘' and its meaning stands cleared from following case laws:- CWT VS. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) The expression ‗belong‘ means ‗to be the property or rightful possession of. So it is the property of a person, or that which is in his possession as of right which is liable to wealth tax. In other words, the liability to Wealth Tctx arises out of ownership of the assets, and not otherwise. CIT VS. MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. 221 TAXMAN 25 (GUJ.…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. ROHAN PATEL, NEW DELHI

Accordingly all the appeals of the revenue with respect to all these assesses are dismissed

ITA 1455/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N.Charyacit, Vs. Rohan Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Asjpp8428L (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Himanshu Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Actpp8270C (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Praduman Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Ajhpp2206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Krish Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aqvpp2875R (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Urmila Chandulal Patel, Central Circle-06, New Delhi 10, Executive Club Road, Chandanholla Mehrauli, New Delhi Pan: Aeipp1395R

For Appellant: Shri Raj Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Smt Sulekha Verma, CIT DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153Section 153C

…hese documents, do not at all belong to assessee and belongs only to Rahul Gautam (Sheela Foam) as well as Owned by Rahul Gautam Group o The definition of ―belong‘' and its meaning stands cleared from following case laws:- CWT VS. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (1976) 103 ITR 536 (SC) The expression ‗belong‘ means ‗to be the property or rightful possession of. So it is the property of a person, or that which is in his possession as of right which is liable to wealth tax. In other words, the liability to Wealth Tctx arises out of ownership of the assets, and not otherwise. CIT VS. MEGHMANI ORGANICS LTD. 221 TAXMAN 25 (GUJ.…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT MEENAKSHI DEVI AVARU

WTA/1/2015HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. SMT.KAMAKSHI DEVI

WTA/2/2014HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT MEENAKSHI DEVI AVARU

WTA/6/2015HC Karnataka30 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…

THE SENATE,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1475/BANG/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri S.Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri T.N.Prakash, Addl.CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 36

…rn any “satisfaction” of the kind required under Section 153C of the said Act.” 9.2 Further, the term ‘belonging to’ has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Bishwanath ITA Nos.1475 to 1481/Bang/2013 Page 15 of 23 Chatterjee (103 ITR 536) and late Nawab Sir Mir Osman Ali Khan (162 ITR 888) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under: “The apex court in the case of Bishwanath Chattejee [1976] 103 ITR 536 (page 539): "The expression 'belong' has been defined as follows in the Oxford English Dictionary :—'To be the property or rightful possession of.' So it is the property of a…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S. BHEEMANENI BUILDERS (I) PVT. LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue as well as cross objections of the assessee are allowed, for statistical purpose

ITA 1362/BANG/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Dec 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri. Abraham P. George & Shri. Vijaypal Raoi.T.A Nos.1362 & 1363/Bang/2010 (Assessment Year : 2005-06 & 2006-07) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(2), Bangalore .. Appellant V. M/S. Bheemaneni Builders (I) P. Ltd, [Now Known As M/S. Bbipl Infrastructure (P) Ltd, No.2/2, 3Rd Block, Rajajinagar, Dr. Rajkumar Road, Bangalore – 560 010 .. Respondent Pan : Aaccb1418N Cross Objection Nos.5 & 6/Bang/2011 (In I.T.A Nos.1362 & 1363/Bang/2010) (Assessment Year : 2005-06 & 2006-07) Assessee By : Shri. A. Shankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. M. Vijay Kumar, Asst. Cit Heard On : 26.11.2015 Pronounced On : 11.12.2015 O R D E R Per Abraham P. George:

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. M. Vijay Kumar, Asst. CIT
Section 153C

…lso noted that Section 132(4A) r.w.s.292C of the Act, gave rise to an automatic presumption that the seized documents belonged to various companies of Divyashree group. Further as per the CIT (A), Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CWT v. Biswanath Chatterjee [103 ITR 536] had held that the expression ‘belonged’ meant property of a person which is in his possession as of right. Relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High ITA.1362 &1363/Bang/2010 Page - 6 CO.5 &6/Bang/2011 Court in the case of Vijayabai N. Chandrani (supra), coordinate bench in the case of Srinivas Naik (supra) and that of Ahmadabad bench of t…

OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR

OLR/6/2015HC Karnataka10 Feb 2015

Bench: RAVI MALIMATH

Section 27

…1/113 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST 2018 PRESENT THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI AND THE HON’BLE Mrs.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA W.T.A.No.1/2015 C/W W.T.A.No.2/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2015, W.T.A.No.4/2015, W.T.A.No.5/2015, W.T.A.No.6/2015, W.T.A.No.3/2014, W.T.A.No.1/2014 & W.T.A.No.2/2014 W.T.A. No.1/2015 Between: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax C.R. Building, Queens Road Bangalore-560001. 2. Wealth Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Bangalore. …Appellants (By Mr. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Meenakshi De…

CWT v. BISHWANATH CHATTERJEE (103 ITR 536) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax