COMMR. OF INCOME TAX vs. PARMESHWARI DEVI SULTANIA

search, it may be Presumed-- (i) that such books of account, other documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing belong or belongs to such person; (ii) that the contents of such books of account and other documents are true; and (iii) that the signature and every other part of such books of account and other documents which

M/S. SUPER MALLS PRIVATE LIMITED. vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act was carried out on 08/09.04.2010 at the residential/business premises of Sh. Tejwant Singh & Sh. Ved Parkash Bharti Group of cases, Karnal, Panipat & Delhi and a survey u/s 133A of the IT. Act, 1961 was also carried out at the business premises of M/s Super Mall (P) Ltd. Karnal & New Delhi. During

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX-I,NEW DELHI vs. VATIKA TOWNSHIP P.LTD

Appeals of the assessees are allowed deleting the surcharge levied by the

seizure took place on 06.10.2001. An order of block assessment in terms of Section 158BC was made in respect of the assessment years 1984 to 2003. The surcharge was levied on 30.06.2003. In support of its contention that the said proviso was retrospective in nature, the learned Additional Solicitor General relies upon a Division Bench decision of this Court

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM

Bench: This Court & On Leave Being Granted, Civil Appeals Have Been Registered. 3.

search and seizure operations on 03.12.1995 and that those books of account were not yet returned. In the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer did not accept the contention of the assessee and made an analysis of the incomings and outgoings of the assessee for the previous year under consideration. After considering various heads of income and sale of publications

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 vs. JASJIT SINGH

The appeals are dismissed in terms of signed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

reassessment of any assessment year within the pe- riod of the six assessment years shall abate, is the date of initiation of the search under Section 5 132 or the requisition under Section 132A. For in- stance, in the present case, with reference to the Puri Group of Companies, such date will be 5.1.2009. However, in the case

MANISH MAHESHWARI vs. ASSTT.COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed

seizure is to be made in terms of Rule 112 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. For the purpose of invoking the said provision, special procedure for assessment is laid down in Chapter XIV-B, the conditions precedent wherefor as laid down must be satisfied. Sections 158BC and 158BD read as under : "158BC. Procedure for block assessment : Where any search

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS vs. M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

reassessment under Section 17 alone is qualified to become a proper officer under Section 28 for the purpose of raising demand of short levy, non-levy or erroneous refund. No other officer can be assigned the functions of the proper officer under Section 28. (ii) Secondly, the judgment was rendered in connection with officers of the Customs (Preventive), who were

MANSAROVAR COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

search and seizure on 15.03.1990 at the premises of Mr. Rattan Gupta & Co., the following things were seized: 1) Books of accounts 2) Funds 3) Memorandum and Articles of Association 4) Blank cheque books of the bank accounts held both in New Delhi, Gangtok and Sikkim 5) Pass books of all the 5 companies both Delhi and Gangtok 6) Blank

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. LAXMAN DAS KHANDELWAL

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

Search and seizure operation was conducted under Section 132 of the Act of 1961 on 11.03.2010 at his residential premises. The assessee submitted return of income on 24.08.2011, declaring total income of Rs.9,35,130/-. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153(D) of 1961 Act. Rupees 9,09,110/- was added on account

INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. VIKRAM SUJITKUMAR BHATIA

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

reassess income of such other person in accordance with the provisions of Section 153A. It also further provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search under Section 132 or making of requisition under Section 132-A in the second proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 153-A shall