NAVDURGA TRANSPORT COMPANY,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee participated in the assessment proceedings, thus validating the notice under section 148 as per section 292BB. However, it directed the AO to tax the addition at normal rates, following the favorable view of conflicting High Court judgments on the applicability of Section 115BBE.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 against the assessee firm for AY 2017-18, treating a deposit of Rs. 2,54,59,579/- as unexplained money under section 69A. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's jurisdiction but remanded the matter to the AO to verify the assessee's claim that the receipts were offered for tax by a partner.
What were the issues?
Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether the enhanced tax rate under Section 115BBE applied to the assessment year.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 69A,Section 251(1)(a),Section 292BB,Section 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO862 citing236 ITR 34 · 1999 · SC
- Subramanian and Anr. v. Siemens India Ltd. and Anr.541 citing156 ITR 11 · 1985 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, Hyderabad
आदेशक���त�ल�पअ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. �नधा�रती/The : Navadurga Transport Company, 15-7-279/3, Muslimjungbridge, Begum Bazar, Assessee Hyderabad, Telangana-500012. 2. राज�व/ : Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(1), O/o, ITO, The Ward-7(1), Signature Towers, Hyderabad, Revenue Telangana. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad. 4. �वभागीय��त�न�ध, आयकरअपील�यअ�धकरण /DR,ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax 6. गाड�फ़ाईल / Guard file
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026