get a quote

Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd Vs Ito

4 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd v ITO 1997 7 ITD 536 MumbaiTribunal CIT v NHKJapan Broadcasting Corporation 2008 305 ITR 137 Delhi 5 CIT v Blackwood Hodge India Pvt Ltd 1971 81 ITR 807 Calcutta 6 Hindustan times v UOI 1998 GJX0005 SC 7 State of Punjab v Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd 2007 11 SCC

Get Price
  • Mobile Jaw Crusher
  • Ball Mill
  • Fly Ash Dryer
  • Lithium Ore Processing Equipment
  • Flotation Machine
  • Copper Ore Processing Equipment
  • Steel Ball
  • Sand Washing Machine
  • High Efficiency Concentrator
  • Cement Mill
  • Tracked Jaw Crusher
  • Cassiterite Crusher
  • Ceramic Ball Mill
  • HVI Impact Sand Maker
  • Ceramsite Production Line

news

  • A limitation period is applicable to section 20111A

    4 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd v ITO 1997 7 ITD 536 MumbaiTribunal CIT v NHKJapan Broadcasting Corporation 2008 305 ITR 137 Delhi 5 CIT v Blackwood Hodge India Pvt Ltd 1971 81 ITR 807 Calcutta 6 Hindustan times v UOI 1998 GJX0005 SC 7 State of Punjab v Bhatinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd 2007 11 SCC

  • USHA AGARWAL AGRA v ITO 44 AGRA Income Tax

    Apr 03 2015 Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd vs ITO rendered by the Honble Supreme ITA No 167Agra2018 Court as referred to by the ld CITA in para 53 of the order under appeal is not at all concerned with the issue at hand and as such it is of no help to the Department 26

  • Hari Shankar Khemka v ITO 2014LL120227 Lexlegis

    As held in case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd v ITO 1999 236 ITR 34 SC correctness or sufficiency of material is not thing to he considered at stage of reopening assessment 43 In conclusion in view If facts of case legal position and interpretation of section 147 by Hon ble Supreme Court it is beyond doubt that assessing officer was

  • Reopening for accommodation entry based on inquiries

    Aug 18 2021 In the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd Versus IncomeTax Officer and others reported in 1999 236 ITR 34SC the Supreme Court observed that the Court has only to see whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the Department could reopen the case The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage

  • Blue Chip Developers P Ltd vs ITO ITAT Delhi

    Dec 07 2019 1 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd v ITO And Others 236 ITR 341 Copy Enclosed where Honble Supreme Court held that in determining whether commencement of reassessment proceedings was valid it has only to be seen whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the department could reopen the case

  • Core Principles of Reassessment with Important Case Laws

    Dec 24 2009 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs Income Tax Officer and Others 1999 236 ITR 34 SC 30 Points not decided while passing assessment order under section 1433 not a case of change of opinion Assessment reopened validly Yuvraj vs Union of India Bom 2009 315 ITR 84 31 Change of opinion bad in law CIT vs Former Finance 2003 264

  • HP Lovecraft by Junji ito junjiito

    Google HP lovecrafts cat name 10 level 2 eatmusubi 1 year ago Yeah HP Lovecraft was a pretty terrible person all around and violently racist Do a little poking around and you can find many references to his racist views and his fear of Aryan civilization being

  • Usha Martin Ventures Ltd amp Anr v Deputy Commissioner

    In Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd vs Incometax Officer reported in 1999 236 ITR 34 the challenge was to the reopening of assessment On examination of the recorded reasons the Supreme Court found that it was the case of the Revenue that the assessee was charging to its Profit amp Loss Account fiscal duties paid during the year as well as labour

  • Banwari Lal Jain v Ito Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

    In Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd v ITO 1999 236 ITR 34 SC while dealing with the validity of commencement of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act the apex court has held that there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the Department could reopen the case The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a

  • HC declines to interfere at the stage of issuance of

    Jul 05 2021 As explained by the Supreme court in Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd v ITO supra In this case we do not have to give a final decision as to whether there is suppression of material facts by the assessee or not We have only to see whether there was prima facie some material on the basis of which the Department could reopen the case

  • HC declines to interfere at the stage of issuance of

    Jul 05 2021 Reliance is also placed on the decisions in Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd v ITO 1999 236 ITR 34 SC Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd v ITO 2007 291 ITR 500 SC and ITO v Purushottam Das Bangur 1997 224 ITR 362 SC 12 The above submissions have been considered The reasons for reopening of the assessment as disclosed by the

  • Amit Brothers vs Income Tax Officer Ward 2 3 7 on

    Jul 07 2016 Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs IncomeTax Officer And Ors on 17 December 1997 Citedby 0 docs Amit Agarwal Bhiwadi vs Ito Alwar on 8 November 2016

  • Correctness of Documents Handed over to AO could not be

    Jul 07 2021 In the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd Versus ITO it has been held that in determining whether the commencement of reassessment proceeding is valid the Court has only to see whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the department has opened the case and that the sufficiency or correctness of the material could not

  • Usha Agarwal vs ITO ITAT Agra

    Jul 10 2018 Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd vs ITO rendered by the Honble Supreme Court as referred to by the ld CITA in para 53 of the order under appeal is not at all concerned with the issue at hand and as such it is of no help to the Department 26

  • Mere mention of receipt of information from DCIT not makes

    Jul 12 2021 In the case of Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd Versus ITO reported in 1999 236 ITR 34 SC it has been held that in determining whether the commencement of reassessment proceeding is valid the Court has only to see whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the department has opened the case and that the sufficiency or

  • the raymond woolen mills ltd share price Nex

    Jul 29 2020 Feb 01 2021 raymond woolen mills ltd vs ito Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd Contact In Ant p ltd 1996 217 itr 597 sc raymond woollen mills ltd v ito 1999 236 itr 34 sc 78 the scope and effect of section 147 of the it act as substituted with effect from 01 04 1989 as also sections 148 to 152 are substantially diff erent from the provisions as they stood prior to

  • Reopening of Assessments Us147 The concept of Mere

    Jun 08 2016 The sufficiency or correctness of the material is not a thing to be considered at this stage Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs ITO and Others 1999 236 ITR 34 SC It was held in CIT vs Former Finance 2003 264 ITR 566 SC that reopening

  • Is Junji Ito the closest to a true spiritual successor to

    Junji Ito is a Japanese horror manga artist and writer He is also the only author Ive encountered that has a style to his horror that truly captures that of Lovecraft especially as described by Lovecraft himself in Supernatural Horror in Literature His work is very strange and incredibly unsettling a good example for those that just want

  • An Overview of Tax Audit TaxGuru

    Mar 01 2010 Patel India PLtd Vs Deputy Commissioner of Incometax 1999 63 TTJ 19 Interest on borrowed funds disallowed to the extent of diversion of funds to sister concerns as interest free advance Interest disallowance same rate as applicable to the bank borrowings Saraya Sugar Mills P Ltd Vs CIT 120 Taxman 411 All interest on borrowed

  • The Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd blogobieganiu

    May 06 2018 The Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd And Vs State Of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd v Coal India Ltd Anr In this regard furthermore it was noticeable that the respondent No 2 South Eastern Coal Fields Limited communicated directly with the appellant with recognition of Raymond Cement Works as division of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vide letter dated

  • Roopshree Jewellers P Ltd vs Ito Itat Kolkata

    Ms Roopshree Jewellers P Ltd AYr201011 2 2 The Ground Nos15 amp 6 of assessees appeal are general in nature and does not require any specific adjudication 3 In respect of Ground No 2 raised by the assessee the ld AR stated before us that he is not pressing the said ground before us The same is reckoned as a statement from the

  • Highpitched assessments us 1471433 of the Incometax

    Of course the sufficiency of the material can not be challenged for taking action us 147148 and therefore to some extent the formation of belief of the AO is within the realm of subjective satisfaction ITO vs Selected Daluband Coal Co P Ltd 1996 217 ITR 597 SC Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd vs ITO 1999 236 ITR 34 SC

  • Home Raymond

    Raymond Group ventured into the engineering business in early 1949 with the inception of JK Files amp Tools This segment comprises of manufacturing of steel files and cutting tools and marketing of hand tools and power tools Today JK Files amp Tools is the largest manufacturer of Steel Files in the world

  • Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs IncomeTax Officer And

    Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs IncomeTax Officer And Others on 17 August 1991 Equivalent citations 1992 1 BomCR 210 1994 207 ITR 929 Bom Shri Dastur further placed reliance on the observations of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Commercial Ahmedabad Mills Co Ltd v ITO 1983 144 ITR 839 However

  • raymond woollen mills

    Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd vs IncomeTax Officer on 31 March 1986 Equivalent citations 1986 18 ITD 64 Mum Bench T Sugla V Balasubramanian Vice Y Meena ORDER V Balasubramanian Vice President 1 The assessee is a manufacturer of woollen material from mostly imported wool and exports them Different grounds of appeal have been raised

  • Shramik Uttarsh Sabha Vs Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd amp

    Shramik Uttarsh Sabha Vs Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd amp Ors 1995 INSC 120 7 February 1995 Citation 1995 Latest Caselaw 118 SC Judgement Date Feb1995 Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 Bombay Industrial Relations Act 1946 Trade Unions Act 1926 Shramik Uttarsh Sabha Vs

  • What is the difference between quotitoquot and quotnitoquot quotitoquot vs

    Synonym for ito smthz Hey thats a good question Gusto can mean either like or want so depending on the pronoun the context would change Gusto ko ito I like this Gusto ko nito I want this Ito is used when it is a Subject or Topic of the sentence Nito is used when it is an Object of the sentence not necessarily a person can also be animals or other things

  • Before Shri RSSyal AM and Shri NVVasudevan JM

    the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd Vs ITO amp Ors 1999 236 ITR 34 SC and Phool Chand Bajrang Lal amp Anr VS ITO amp Anr 1993 203 ITR 456 SC along with other several other judgments on the point are clear authorities

  • Raymond gt Company History gt Textiles Woollen amp

    The Raymond Woollen Mills Kenya Ltd became a subsidiary of the Company The Companys holding in this subsidiary at the end of March 1996 stood at 540000 of K Shs 200 each out of 7

  • Versus

    time Reliance is also placed on the decisions in Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd v ITO 1999 236 ITR 34 SC Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd v ITO 2007 291 ITR 500 SC and ITO v Purushottam Das Bangur 1997 224 ITR 362 SC 12 The above submissions have been considered The reasons