<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1984 (1) TMI 85 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56732</link>
    <description>Reassessment under section 147(a) was treated as valid where the assessee had not disclosed the wife&#039;s share of firm profits in the return despite the disclosure requirement. On those admitted facts, the income was liable to be included in the assessee&#039;s hands under section 64(1), and the reassessment notices under section 148 were upheld. The reasoning was supported by the then-prevailing Allahabad High Court view relied on in the reassessment process and by the later Full Bench affirmation of that view.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:18:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=95194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (1) TMI 85 - ITAT ALLAHABAD-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56732</link>
      <description>Reassessment under section 147(a) was treated as valid where the assessee had not disclosed the wife&#039;s share of firm profits in the return despite the disclosure requirement. On those admitted facts, the income was liable to be included in the assessee&#039;s hands under section 64(1), and the reassessment notices under section 148 were upheld. The reasoning was supported by the then-prevailing Allahabad High Court view relied on in the reassessment process and by the later Full Bench affirmation of that view.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>