Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. v. CIT(SC)

110 ITR 630Reported decision#18709 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2015.

Judgments citing Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. v. CIT(SC)

DCIT, Karaikudi vs. M.R.M.Plantations P. Ltd., Karaikudi

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2947/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…aterial facts, the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. This decision was taken in the following cases by the Supreme Court. 1. Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. Vs CIT(SC) 159 ITR 124 2. Hazi Amir Moh. Mir Ahmed Vs CIT, Amritsar (SC) 110 ITR 630 3. ITO I Ward, Distt. VI Calcutta & others Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das (SC) 103 ITR 437 4. Malegon Electricity Co. P. Ltd vs. CIT , Bombay (SC) 78 ITR 466. 5. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd vs. ITO, Companies Dist I Calcutta and another (SC) 41 ITR 191. In this case, on verification of statement of income by the Assessing Officer, it has been found that t…

DCIT, Karaikudi vs. M.R.M.Plantations P. Ltd., Karaikudi

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2946/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…sing Officer might not. But if there is omission to disclose material facts, the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. This decision was taken in the following cases by the Supreme Court. 1. Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. Vs CIT(SC) 159 ITR 124 2. Hazi Amir Moh. Mir Ahmed Vs CIT, Amritsar (SC) 110 ITR 630 3. ITO I Ward, Distt. VI Calcutta & others Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das (SC) 103 ITR 437 4. Malegon Electricity Co. P. Ltd vs. CIT , Bombay (SC) 78 ITR 466. 5. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd vs. ITO, Companies Dist I Calcutta and another (SC) 41 ITR 191. In this case, on verification of statemen…

M.R.M.Plantations P. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2773/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…aterial facts, the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. This decision was taken in the following cases by the Supreme Court. 1. Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. Vs CIT(SC) 159 ITR 124 2. Hazi Amir Moh. Mir Ahmed Vs CIT, Amritsar (SC) 110 ITR 630 3. ITO I Ward, Distt. VI Calcutta & others Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das (SC) 103 ITR 437 4. Malegon Electricity Co. P. Ltd vs. CIT , Bombay (SC) 78 ITR 466. 5. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd vs. ITO, Companies Dist I Calcutta and another (SC) 41 ITR 191. In this case, on verification of statement of income by the Assessing Officer, it has been found that t…

M.R.M.Plantations P. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Madurai

In the results, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2772/CHNY/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2015AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Chandra Poojari] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2772 & 2773/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2005-06 & 2006-2007. M/S. M.R.M. Plantations P. Ltd, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.40, M.R.M Arcade, Income Tax, Amman Sannathi Street, Circle Ii, Karaikudi Madurai [Pan Aaccm 9058R ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. T.N. Seetharaman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. P. Radhakrishnan, IRS, JCIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 148Section 57Section 6(3)

…sing Officer might not. But if there is omission to disclose material facts, the Assessing Officer has jurisdiction to reopen the assessment. This decision was taken in the following cases by the Supreme Court. 1. Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. Vs CIT(SC) 159 ITR 124 2. Hazi Amir Moh. Mir Ahmed Vs CIT, Amritsar (SC) 110 ITR 630 3. ITO I Ward, Distt. VI Calcutta & others Vs Lakhmani Mewal Das (SC) 103 ITR 437 4. Malegon Electricity Co. P. Ltd vs. CIT , Bombay (SC) 78 ITR 466. 5. Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd vs. ITO, Companies Dist I Calcutta and another (SC) 41 ITR 191. In this case, on verification of statemen…

Indo-Aden Salt Mfg. & Trading Co. v. CIT(SC) (110 ITR 630) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax