Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Proviso to Section 13 Applied: Court Upholds Income-tax Officer's Decision on Gold Transactions</h1> <h3>Ganeshi Lal Chhappan Lal Versus Commissioner of Income-tax</h3> The court held that the proviso to Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act was applicable in the case, justifying the Income-tax Officer's decision to ... - Issues Involved:1. Applicability of the proviso to Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act.2. Justification for accepting book profits for silver transactions and rejecting them for gold transactions without giving notice.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Applicability of the Proviso to Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act:The primary issue was whether the proviso to Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act was applicable in the circumstances of this case. The assessee, a firm engaged in sarrafa business, had its account books maintained according to the mercantile accountancy system and regularly kept. However, the profits from gold transactions as shown in the books were deemed 'ridiculously low' by the Income-tax authorities, leading them to apply a flat rate under the proviso to Section 13.The Commissioner of Income-tax argued that the Income-tax Officer (ITO) alone has the discretion to decide if the method of accounting reflects true profits. This position was supported by precedents such as Ganga Ram Balmokand v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab, which held that the burden was on the assessee to prove that the profits disclosed by the books were the real profits. The Commissioner also cited Badri Shah Sohan Lal v. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjab, where a low rate of profit disclosed by the books justified rejecting the accounts due to the absence of vouchers or other material for verification.The court observed that the discretion vested in the ITO by the proviso to Section 13 should not be arbitrary. Referring to the Privy Council decision in Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Presidency and Aden v. Sarangpur Cotton Manufacturing Company, Ltd., it was emphasized that the ITO must consider whether the income, profits, and gains can be properly deduced from the method of accounting employed by the assessee.The court concluded that the ITO did not act arbitrarily but exercised his judgment, supported by material evidence. Factors such as the excessively low profits from gold transactions, the lack of details in the assessee's books regarding the nature and sellers of ornaments, and the favorable market conditions for gold were considered. The ITO's decision to apply the proviso to Section 13 was thus justified.2. Justification for Accepting Book Profits for Silver Transactions and Rejecting Them for Gold Transactions Without Giving Notice:The second issue was whether the income-tax authorities were justified in accepting the book profits for silver transactions while rejecting them for gold transactions without giving notice to the assessee. The court noted that notices were issued to the assessee under Sections 22 (4) and 23 (2) of the Act, and the assessee's munib was specifically questioned regarding the profits from gold and silver transactions.The court held that there was no obligation on the authorities to serve any other kind of notice upon the assessee. The assessee was not prejudiced by the lack of additional notice, as the necessary inquiries and notices were already served. Therefore, the income-tax authorities were justified in their actions.Conclusion:1. The proviso to Section 13 of the Act was applicable in the circumstances of this case.2. There was no necessity for the income-tax authorities to issue a separate notice to the assessee before accepting the book profits for silver transactions and rejecting them for gold transactions.A copy of this judgment under the seal of the Court and the signature of the Registrar will be sent to the Commissioner of Income-tax.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found