“Section 252(1)”
The decision most relied on for Section 252(1) is CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (252 ITR 1), cited in 452 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 252(1)
Levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act is mandatory. Tax statutes are to be interpreted strictly, allowing no room for purposive interpretation.
The Assessing Officer must grant the correct deduction after due verification of claims made by the assessee, even if not perfectly articulated initially. This principle applies in assessment proceedings, including those involving specific deductions like those for export-oriented units under Section 10B.
Seized material obtained during a search operation must be read in its entirety, and the 'pick and choose' theory cannot be adopted when interpreting such material.
Mere production of account books, balance sheet, or profit and loss account does not necessarily amount to a full and true disclosure as required by Explanation 1 to Section 147 for initiating reassessment proceedings. This principle is distinct from a reassessment based on a mere change of opinion by the Assessing Officer on an issue already examined.
The Bombay High Court ruled that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) relied on Circular No. 609 and the decision in CIT v. S.C. Takur & Brothers to disallow depreciation exceeding 15% on motor vehicles, implicitly acknowledging a specific interpretation of depreciation claims for certain vehicles.
The case of CIT v. Anjum M.H. Ghaswala (SC) is authority for the proposition that the Settlement Commission's power regarding waiver of interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C of the Income Tax Act can be exercised in relation to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT).