Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichur Versus K. Abbas Haji

2009 (10) TMI 943 - KERALA HIGH COURT

I.T.A. Nos.24,15, 17, 19, 22, 23, 28 and 34 of 2009 - Dated:- 27-10-2009 - C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR AND V.K. MOHANAN JJ. For Petitioner: SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX For Respondent: SRI. P. RAGHUNATH ORDER Ramachandran Nair, J. All the above app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee, a Non-Resident Indian, was found to have made various investments, the sources of which were sought for in the course of income tax assessments for the above 4 years. Even though the assessee contended that an amount of ₹ 12 lakhs wa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r an addition of ₹ 3,39,000/- in the assessment for all these years. In other words, his explanation for the source of investment in excess of ₹ 3,39,000/-, ₹ 8,61,000/- was accepted by the officer merely because he agreed for addit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

3,39,000/-. The assessee specifically raised objection stating that assessments were agreed assessments and additions for the first three years at the rate of ₹ 3,39,000/- and for 2004-05, ₹ 3.5 lakhs were agreed by the assessee. However .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

wed the appeals against which the Departmental appeals filed were dismissed by the Tribunal. While for the three years, cases were not decided on merits, for the remaining years, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the C.I.T (Appeals). It is against .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

see that the assessments were agreed assessments and so much so, there was no justification to levy penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. Since the assessments were agreed assessments, no appeals are maintainable against the assessment order .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version