M.K RAJENDRAN PILLAI,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOLLAM, KOLLAM
In the result the appeals for AYs 2012-13 to 2017-18 stand partly allowed whereas the appeal for AY 2018-19 stands allowed on legal grounds in terms of our above order
ITA 585/COCH/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Jan 2023AY 2017-2018
Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, J.M. & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, A.M.
For Appellant: Shri Sajjan Kumar Tulsiyan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. J.M Jamuna Devi (Addl. CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 245C(1)
reassessment.
In addition, it is held that in the light of the Supreme Court dictum in Hotel Blue
Moon (supra), the view expressed in Humboldt Wedag India (P.) Ltd. (supra) is per incuriam and, as such, not good law."
13. Similarly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das
Khandelwal [2019] 108 taxmann.com 183/266 Taxman
