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

2006 Supreme(P&H) 1916

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, RAJESH BINDAL
Bharti Engg. Corpn. – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Judgment

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by making the following substantive prayers:

(i) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order/letter dt. 12th Jan., 2006 (Annex. P-13) passed by respondent No. 3;

(ii) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus thereby directing the respondents to allow the claim for the refund of Rs. 5,61,380 along with interest for the asst. yr. 1989-90;

2. The petitioner, which is a partnership firm carrying on the business of manufacturing and sale of diesel engines and spares, filed its return of income, for the asst. yr. 1989-90 declaring net assessable income at Rs. 4,55,289. Not satisfied with the return filed by the petitioner, the AO issued notices to the petitioner under Sections 143(2)/142(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (for short the Act) and vide assessment order dt. 31st March, 1992 assessed the income of the petitioner at Rs. 17,45,390. Aggrieved against the assessment order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who vide order dt. 10th Nov., 1995 accepted the appeal of the petitioner and restored the matter back to AO to redetermine the liability of the petitioner after affording reasonable opportunity




















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