SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(Guj) 1037

M.S.SHAH, D.M.DHARMADHIKARI
RUSHIL INDUSTRIES LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
HARSH PRAKASH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: MANISH R.BHATT, MIHIR JOSHI, S.N.Soparkar

D. M. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

( 1 ) ). After hearing the learned counsel, Rule is issued. Learned counsel for the Department waives service of Rule. Learned counsel for both the parties are finally heard.

( 2 ) ). The petitioner, by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges the notice dated 29-8-2000 issued by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Rajkot (respondent) under the provisions of Section 158-BC r. w. Section 158-BD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. (`the Act for short ).

( 3 ) ). According to the petitioner it has been regularly assessed for income tax under the Act. It is engaged in the business of ship breaking at Alang, District : Bhavnagar. According to the petitioner in the course of business it sells materials to several parties and receive the price of the same some times in cash and at times in cheques. In some cases, cheques are drawn by the debtors from their own bank accounts and at times the cheques are obtained from other concerned persons with whom the purchasers may have transactions. The purchase price so realised, however, is duly credited to the profit and loss account of the petitioner. As is stated, on affidavit-in-reply, by th










Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top