BRIJESH CHANDWANI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE -6(1), HYDERABAD

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed on this ground alone

reassessment notice. 80. In Ashish Agarwal (supra), this Court directed that Section 148 notices which were challenged before various High Courts "shall be deemed to have been issued under section 148-A of the Income-tax Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of Section

ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTL.TXN)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal for the A.Y. 2009-10 is dismissed as withdrawn”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of the period of two years from the end of the relevant assessment year.” 6.1. The Revenue has relied upon the provisions of section 153B

ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTL.TXN)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal for the A.Y. 2009-10 is dismissed as withdrawn”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of the period of two years from the end of the relevant assessment year.” 6.1. The Revenue has relied upon the provisions of section 153B

ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INTL.TXN)-II,, HYDERABAD vs. M/S MIDWEST GRANITE (P) LIMITED,, HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal for the A.Y. 2009-10 is dismissed as withdrawn”

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

reassessment or recomputation to be made in pursuance of the notice is to be made on him as the agent of such non-resident, the notice shall not be issued after the expiry of the period of two years from the end of the relevant assessment year.” 6.1. The Revenue has relied upon the provisions of section 153B

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

reassessment, as explained under Section 292CC and the limitation provided under Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 22. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that, although the joint warrant of authorization was issued in the name of the searched person and other associated persons/entities, but separate panchanama was drawn

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PVT LTD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(4), HYDERABAD

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

reassessment, as explained under Section 292CC and the limitation provided under Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 22. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that, although the joint warrant of authorization was issued in the name of the searched person and other associated persons/entities, but separate panchanama was drawn

EXPRESSWAY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

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

reassessment, as explained under Section 292CC and the limitation provided under Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 22. In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that, although the joint warrant of authorization was issued in the name of the searched person and other associated persons/entities, but separate panchanama was drawn

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee

ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD vs. PRATHIMA INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment shall be made separately in the name of each person mentioned in such Section 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, a panchanama drawn in relation to one individual at that specific person’s residential premises cannot extend the limitation in the case of another assessee whose search had concluded earlier. In the case of the assessee