BASIR AHMED SISODIA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

bogus   entries   effected   by   the   appellant/assessee. Resultantly,   the   penalty   proceedings   under   Section   271   were initiated by the Officer.  That order, however, has now been set aside by the appellate authority [CIT(A)] in the appeal preferred by the appellant/assessee, vide order dated 13.1.2011 with a finding that the appellant/assessee had not made any concealment of 10 income   or   furnished   inaccurate

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S JINDAL STEEL THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

Appeals are hereby dismissed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

28. Thus, market value of the power supplied by the assessee to its industrial units should be computed by considering the rate at which the State Electricity Board supplied power to the consumers in the open market and not comparing it with the rate of power when sold to a supplier i.e., sold by the assessee to the State Electricity

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO

purchase and sale. It is true, as the High Court has observed, that this information could have been acquired by the Income Tax Officer if he had exercised due diligence at the time of the original assessment itself. It does not appear, however,   that   the   attention   of   the   Income   Tax   Officer   was directed by anything before him to the fact

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(CENTRAL) 1 vs. NRA IRON AND STEEL PVT. LTD. THROUGH DIRECTOR

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

28,387/- for A.Y. 2009-10. 10. Ganga Builders Ltd. Kolkatta It was submitted, that the company had applied for shares of NRA Iron and Steel Pvt.Ltd. However, they had not specified how many shares, and at what premium they had purchased. The Company had not enclosed their Bank Statement showing the source of fund for share application money