SHRI HARSH VARDHAN ,JALANDHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

Bench: Sh. Ravish Sood & Dr. M. L. Meena

2) of Section 22 and may proceed to reassess such income, profits or gains". The argument is that the service of the requisite notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of any reassessment made under Section 34; and if a valid notice is not issued as required, proceedings taken by the Income Tax Officer in pursuance

M/S LORD MAHAVIR HOMEOPATHIC MEDICAL COLLAGE & HOSPITAL,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2. Every order granting or refusing registration under clause (b) of sub- section (1) shall be passed before the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which the application was received under clause (a) [or clause (aa) [or clause (ab)] of sub-section (1)] of section 12A.] 18. Based on the above said amendment

M/S LORD MAHAVIRA HOMEOP[ATHIC MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- ( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2. Every order granting or refusing registration under clause (b) of sub- section (1) shall be passed before the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which the application was received under clause (a) [or clause (aa) [or clause (ab)] of sub-section (1)] of section 12A.] 18. Based on the above said amendment

LORD MAHAVIRA HOMOEOPHATIC MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

In the result the 2nd ground raised by the assessee is liable to be allowed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

2. Every order granting or refusing registration under clause (b) of sub- section (1) shall be passed before the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which the application was received under clause (a) [or clause (aa) [or clause (ab)] of sub-section (1)] of section 12A.] 18. Based on the above said amendment

M/S CITI PLAZA,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 3(1), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

reassessment beyond the period prescribed by sub-s. (2), unless the case fell under any of the other sub-sections under s. 153 or other provision extending the said period of limitation. No such provision is brought to notice. The only provision relied upon is cl. (ii) in sub-s. (3). Clause (ii) contemplates a situation where certain orders have

SH. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCME TAX , BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2(40) of the Act, under the accepted canons of construction, wherever those words are used, the meaning given in the definition clause must be substituted. This has also to be considered in the light of the fact that at several places the assessment under s. 143 or s. 144 has been used in contradistinction with reassessment under

SHRI. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2(40) of the Act, under the accepted canons of construction, wherever those words are used, the meaning given in the definition clause must be substituted. This has also to be considered in the light of the fact that at several places the assessment under s. 143 or s. 144 has been used in contradistinction with reassessment under

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVTE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

2) of Section 153A would be redundant and/or re-writing the said provisions, which is not permissible underthe law. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are incomplete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi HighCourt in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and theGujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction(supra) and the decisions