https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17804 The court rejected the applicant's application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking direction to ITAT to state questions of law. The case involved the seizure of jewellery and ornaments during a raid on business premises, leading to an assessment order under section 132(5) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax invoked section 69 of the Act to treat the seized assets as the applicant's income. Despite arguments challenging the application of section 69 and reassessment of scooter investment, the court found no merit in the application for reference, emphasizing the lack of legal questions and substantiated evidence supporting the applicant's claims. en-us Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 18:15:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17804 The court rejected the applicant's application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking direction to ITAT to state questions of law. The case involved the seizure of jewellery and ornaments during a raid on business premises, leading to an assessment order under section 132(5) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax invoked section 69 of the Act to treat the seized assets as the applicant's income. Despite arguments challenging the application of section 69 and reassessment of scooter investment, the court found no merit in the application for reference, emphasizing the lack of legal questions and substantiated evidence supporting the applicant's claims. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17804