REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

RAJESH KUMAR Appellant

V/S

D.C.I.T. Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

H.L.TREHAN AND OTHERS V. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
A K KRAIPAK VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA BHAVAN BOARDING AND LODGING BANGALORE THE ALL MYSORE HOTELS AND ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF MYSORE [REFERRED TO]
S L KAPOOR VS. JAGMOHAN [REFERRED TO]
SWADESHI COTTON MILLS NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION UNION OF INDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
T SHEPHARD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND VS. CHOKHAMAL CONTRACTORS [REFERRED TO]
PRAGATI SAHAKARI BANK BARODA VS. RAMNIKBHAI DAHYA BAI BARODA [REFERRED TO]
INDIA CEMENT LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
S N MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. D T C MAZDOOR CONGRESS ANB [REFERRED TO]
UPTRON INDIA LIMITED VS. SHAMMI BHAN [REFERRED TO]
HAJI ABDUL SHAKOOR AND COMPANY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
CANARA BANK VS. DEBASIS DAS [REFERRED TO]
DELHI FARMING AND CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY VS. MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
S B P AND CO VS. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD [REFERRED TO]
V C BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY VS. SHRIKANT [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD VS. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY [REFERRED TO]
YUM RESTAURANTS INDIA PVT LTD VS. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX DELHI [REFERRED TO]
PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CO LTD VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
BATA INDIA LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
West Bengal State Co operative Bank LTD VS. Joint Commissioner of Income tax [REFERRED TO]
ATLAS COPCO (INDIA) LTD VS. V.S. SAMUEL, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Appellant No. 1 is a proprietory concern. It is an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). A raid was conducted in their premises on 18.12.2002. Some documents including their books of accounts were seized; a few of which were in the hard disk of the computer. They upon seizure all through remained in possession of the respondents. Assessment was under the law required to be completed within a period of two years. A notice was issued under Section 158BC of the Act by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 18 requiring the appellants to submit return of undisclosed income for the block period of ten years pursuant whereto returns were filed. A notice was issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. Questionnaire was issued on 1.11.2004. On 22.11.2004, the Deputy Commissioner decided to proceed first with the assessment proceedings under Section 158BC of the Act in the case of three individuals, viz., Smt. Sushila Rani, Smt. Sunayana Prabhakar and Smt. Sunanda Prabhakar as also two companies, viz., M/s. Daily Agro Milk Food (P) Ltd. and M/s. Sushila Milk Specialities (P) Ltd. The said questionnaire was responded to. Affidavits were also filed before the Deputy Commissioner on behalf of M/s. Sushila Milk Specialities (P) Ltd.

(3.) By a letter dated 23.11.2004, the Deputy Commissioner mooted a proposal for special audit in terms of Section 142(2A) of the Act to the Commissioner of Income Tax stating:

Click here to view full judgment.

RAJESH KUMAR Vs. DY C I T

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address