ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2, DIBRUGARH vs. T & T PROJECTS LTD., GUWAHATI

In the result and for the reasons discussed above, we find no merit in this appeal

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.208/Gau/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2010-11)

deduction of Rs.54,733/- and Rs.5,42,548/- as dividend and profit from joint Venture respectively but did not add back in income from fixed deposits of Rs.1,34,99,632/- and miscellaneous income of Rs.57,740/-. Hence, there was an escapement of income to the tune of Rs.1,35,57,372/-( Rs.1,34,99,632 +Rs.57,740). Accordingly

AMPLEX PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGARTALA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

reassess the total income of each of the six assessment years. The second proviso contemplates that if any of the aforesaid six assessments is pending on the date of initiation of the search or requisition, the same shall abate, Explaining the second proviso of the section, it is stated that the second proviso provides that if on the date

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

reassessments not pending on the date of initiation of search remains unabated and cannot be disturbed except in cases where incriminating material indicating otherwise has been found in the course of search. This view has been upheld in many judicial authorities as will be brought out in the discussion in the later parts of this submission. c. The expression “relevant

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

reassessments not pending on the date of initiation of search remains unabated and cannot be disturbed except in cases where incriminating material indicating otherwise has been found in the course of search. This view has been upheld in many judicial authorities as will be brought out in the discussion in the later parts of this submission. c. The expression “relevant

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -II, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. ARIHANT INTERNATIONAL LIMITED , GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sri Sonjoy Sarma

reassessment holding that the Revenue was unable to satisfy the conditions precedent in first proviso to Section 147 of the Act. 9.6. Further, in the case of Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd Vs. CIT (291 ITR 500) Hon’ble Supreme Court held that an assessment originally completed u/s 143(1) can be reopened by an AO at any time

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read as under: “Where Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee had received accommodation entry of bogus LTCG from penny stock, since Assessing Officer had taken note of ITBA data

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAS OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read as under: “Where Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee had received accommodation entry of bogus LTCG from penny stock, since Assessing Officer had taken note of ITBA data

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. LINKSTAR PROMOTERS (P) LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

reassess and not the power to review. (10) To check whether it is a case of change of opinion or not one has to see its meaning in literal as well as legal terms. The word change of opinion implies formulation of opinion and then a change thereof. In terms of assessment proceedings, it means formulation of belief

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. WINNER DEALTRADE (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

reassess and not the power to review. (10) To check whether it is a case of change of opinion or not one has to see its meaning in literal as well as legal terms. The word change of opinion implies formulation of opinion and then a change thereof. In terms of assessment proceedings, it means formulation of belief

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

deducted source. Such expenses was allowable in law and hence the addition made be reversed. (5) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellate order passed was in violation of principals of natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

deducted source. Such expenses was allowable in law and hence the addition made be reversed. (5) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellate order passed was in violation of principals of natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made

AGRIM INFRAPROJECT PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, this appeal of the assessee i

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

deducted source. Such expenses was allowable in law and hence the addition made be reversed. (5) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the appellate order passed was in violation of principals of natural justice hence is bad in law and be quashed. (6) For that in the facts and circumstances of the case the assessment made

MAYURPLY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.,HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result IT(SS)A Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

reassess the return of the assessee not only for the undisclosed income, which was IT(SS)A Nos.1 to 7/GTY/2024 & 224/GTY/2024 Mayurply Industries Pvt. Ltd; A.Y. 10-11, 12-13 to 17-18, 18-19 found during the search operation but also with regard to material that was available at the time of original assessment does not require any interference

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

deducting TDS. A chart in respect of the same is enclosed. I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2021-22 Greenwood Resorts Private Limited. 20. That Sir our case for A.Y 14-15 has been scrutinized i.e. the initial year in which major loan of Rs.4,30,00,000/- has been accepted and in assessment same

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

deducting TDS. A chart in respect of the same is enclosed. I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2021-22 Greenwood Resorts Private Limited. 20. That Sir our case for A.Y 14-15 has been scrutinized i.e. the initial year in which major loan of Rs.4,30,00,000/- has been accepted and in assessment same

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

deducting TDS. A chart in respect of the same is enclosed. I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2021-22 Greenwood Resorts Private Limited. 20. That Sir our case for A.Y 14-15 has been scrutinized i.e. the initial year in which major loan of Rs.4,30,00,000/- has been accepted and in assessment same

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

deducting TDS. A chart in respect of the same is enclosed. I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2021-22 Greenwood Resorts Private Limited. 20. That Sir our case for A.Y 14-15 has been scrutinized i.e. the initial year in which major loan of Rs.4,30,00,000/- has been accepted and in assessment same

GREENWOOD RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, ITA No. 114/GTY/2024 for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

deducting TDS. A chart in respect of the same is enclosed. I.T.A. Nos.: 110 to 118/GTY/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 to 2021-22 Greenwood Resorts Private Limited. 20. That Sir our case for A.Y 14-15 has been scrutinized i.e. the initial year in which major loan of Rs.4,30,00,000/- has been accepted and in assessment same