ACIT NON CORP CIRCLE 1 (1) FORMERLY KNOWN AS BUSINESS CIRCLE 1, CHENNAI vs. M/S DEOLITE HASKINS & SELLS, CHENNAI

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri A.Mohan Alankamony

8 (MP) ITA Nos.2578 to 2580/chny/2017 :- 29 -: C.O.Nos.47to 49/Chny/2018 M/s.Deloittee Haskins & Sells 5.6. In Dilip S. Dahanukar vs Asst. CIT (2001) 248 ITR 147, 150-51 (Bom.). The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court held as under:- “Held, that there was material on record on the basis of survey and statement of person to show that the assessee had wrongfully

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

255 ITR 220, found that Explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of assessment or reassessment on the grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act. Referring to Explanation 3 to Section

ACIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD., CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

255 ITR 220, found that Explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of assessment or reassessment on the grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act. Referring to Explanation 3 to Section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

255 ITR 220, found that Explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of assessment or reassessment on the grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act. Referring to Explanation 3 to Section

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR M/S. MASCON GLOBAL LTD. (IN LIQUIDATION), CHENNAI

Accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

255 ITR 220, found that Explanation 3 to Section 147 of the Act lifts the embargo, which was inserted by judicial interpretation, on the making of assessment or reassessment on the grounds other than those on the basis of which a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act. Referring to Explanation 3 to Section

N.BALADANDAYUDAM, REP BY POWER HOLDER R.RAVICHANDRAN ,ERODE vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 5(2) , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-2011 is allowed whereas as those for assessment years

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

reassess any other income, which may have escaped assessment but which did not form the subject matter of the notice under section 148. This view was adopted in the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vipan Khanna [2002] 255 ITR 220 and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Travancore Cements Ltd. [2008] ITA Nos.1677

N.BALADANDAYUDAM, REP BY POWER HOLDER R.RAVICHANDRAN ,ERODE vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 5(2) , COIMBATORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-2011 is allowed whereas as those for assessment years

Bench: Shri Abraham P. George]

reassess any other income, which may have escaped assessment but which did not form the subject matter of the notice under section 148. This view was adopted in the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Vipan Khanna [2002] 255 ITR 220 and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Travancore Cements Ltd. [2008] ITA Nos.1677

PKD TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, POLLACHI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2053/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1820 & 1819/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Pkd Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Pkd Matriculation School, V. Ward I(2) / Ward 1(1), Coimbatore Road, Pollachi. Pollachi – 642 001. Pan : Aaaap 1297 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

reassessment was also made a part of assessment. In our opinion, the said decision would not help the assessee since admittedly no proceedings were pending before the Assessing Officer for the impugned assessment, as on the date of grant of the registration under Section 12AA of the Act. The plain words used in first proviso “for which assessment proceedings

P.K.D.TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, POLLACHI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2053/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1820 & 1819/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Pkd Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Pkd Matriculation School, V. Ward I(2) / Ward 1(1), Coimbatore Road, Pollachi. Pollachi – 642 001. Pan : Aaaap 1297 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

reassessment was also made a part of assessment. In our opinion, the said decision would not help the assessee since admittedly no proceedings were pending before the Assessing Officer for the impugned assessment, as on the date of grant of the registration under Section 12AA of the Act. The plain words used in first proviso “for which assessment proceedings

P.K.D.TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, POLLACHI

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2053/Mds/2014 आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1820 & 1819/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S Pkd Trust, The Income Tax Officer, Pkd Matriculation School, V. Ward I(2) / Ward 1(1), Coimbatore Road, Pollachi. Pollachi – 642 001. Pan : Aaaap 1297 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

reassessment was also made a part of assessment. In our opinion, the said decision would not help the assessee since admittedly no proceedings were pending before the Assessing Officer for the impugned assessment, as on the date of grant of the registration under Section 12AA of the Act. The plain words used in first proviso “for which assessment proceedings

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 170 (Ker). This line of authority would now cease to reflect the correct position in law by virtue of the amendment which has been brought in by the insertion of Explanation 3 to section

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 170 (Ker). This line of authority would now cease to reflect the correct position in law by virtue of the amendment which has been brought in by the insertion of Explanation 3 to section

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 170 (Ker). This line of authority would now cease to reflect the correct position in law by virtue of the amendment which has been brought in by the insertion of Explanation 3 to section

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and in the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Tranvancore Cements Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2008] 305 ITR 170 (Ker). This line of authority would now cease to reflect the correct position in law by virtue of the amendment which has been brought in by the insertion of Explanation 3 to section

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available

THANUSHKODI NARAYANAN,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessees in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

reassessment, the assessment order is not sustainable and relied upon the judgment cited as CIT vs. Kabul Chawla - 380 ITR 173 (Del.). 10. Assessee brought on record copy of computation of income along with acknowledgement of return for income, copy of special audit report furnished u/s.142(2A) and reply filed by the assessee to the special audit report, available