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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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>Court upholds block assessment under Section 158BD of Income-tax Act, dismissing challenges based on undisclosed income evidence.</h1> The court dismissed the petitions challenging the notices issued under Section 158BD of the Income-tax Act. It ruled that the initiation of block ... Initiation of block assessment u/s 158BD r.w. section 158BC – Benami transactions - Held that:- The group concerns of Shri Rajendra Goayl i.e. Goyal Industries Ltd., Goyal Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. and Foremost Finvest Pvt. Ltd. made fictitious sales to the concerns namely (i) Raju Fabrics (ii) Gunjan Exports,and (iii) Aditya Yarn Pvt. Ltd. were received from benami concerns of Goyal Industries Group - the source of credit either by cheque or cash in the benami accounts to the extent of ₹ 92,01,74,261/- remains unexplained - The accounts have been detected by virtue of inquiry in the cheques found from the locker of Shri Pursottam Mundra, employee of Shri Surajnath Sidh, who is involved in the business of cheques discounting - it cannot be said that the AO has committed any error and/or any illegality in initiating the block assessment proceedings u/s 158BD. When the subjective satisfaction has been arrived at by the AO for initiation of the proceedings u/s 158BD of the Act on the basis of the material collected during the course of search/inquiry, it cannot be said that satisfaction arrived at by the Assessing Officer while initiating proceedings under section 158BC of the Act has been vitiated in any manner - There is ample material on record in the satisfaction note against the respective petitioners and Goyal Industries Ltd and another - even the Rajendra Goyal is the Director of Goyal Industries Ltd. and the Company i.e. Goyal Industries Ltd. is run through its Director/Manager/employees etc. - no error or illegality has been committed in issuing notice u/s 158BD – Decided against the assessee. Issues Involved:1. Legality of the notice issued under Section 158BD of the Income-tax Act.2. Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding undisclosed income belonging to the petitioners.3. Material evidence supporting the initiation of block assessment proceedings.Detailed Analysis:Legality of the Notice Issued Under Section 158BD of the Income-tax Act:The petitioners challenged the notices issued under Section 158BD of the Income-tax Act, seeking to quash them on the grounds of illegality and non-compliance with statutory requirements. The court noted that the notices were issued based on a satisfaction note which detailed the findings from a search conducted under Section 132 in the case of Malpani Groups. The court found that the notices were issued following the discovery of significant incriminating evidence, including dishonored cheques and bank account transactions, which indicated undisclosed income.Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer Regarding Undisclosed Income Belonging to the Petitioners:The petitioners argued that the satisfaction required under Section 158BD was not met, as the undisclosed income was allegedly linked to Rajendra Goyal individually and not the respective petitioners. The court examined the satisfaction note and found that the Assessing Officer had indeed arrived at a subjective satisfaction based on statements and material collected during the search. Statements from individuals like Dilip Makwana and Satyanarayan Sharma, who were linked to Goyal Industries Ltd., provided substantial evidence that the undisclosed income was connected to the petitioners.Material Evidence Supporting the Initiation of Block Assessment Proceedings:The court reviewed the evidence presented in the satisfaction note, which included detailed transactions in various bank accounts, statements from employees, and the operations of benami accounts. The court noted that the accounts in question were found to be operated by employees of Goyal Industries Ltd. under the instructions of Rajendra Goyal. The evidence indicated that the cash deposited and transactions conducted through these accounts were part of a larger scheme involving Goyal Industries Ltd. and its associated entities. The court concluded that the material evidence justified the initiation of block assessment proceedings under Section 158BD.Conclusion:The court dismissed the petitions, ruling that the initiation of block assessment proceedings under Section 158BD was legally justified. The court found no error or illegality in the satisfaction arrived at by the Assessing Officer, and the notices issued were based on substantial material evidence collected during the search. The interim relief granted earlier was vacated, and the petitions were dismissed with no costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found