KIDS CLINIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT

capital gains of Rs.1,33,43,710/- to the extent of Rs.51,37,329/- and with interest under Sections 234A

SHRI N G CHANDRA REDDY (HUF) vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

The appeal is disposed of in the above terms

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstance of the case." 3. The brief facts are that the assessee, a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF), filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2005–06. In the said return, the assessee did not disclose the capital gains

M/S GAONKAR MINES vs. THE ADDL COMMISSIONER

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

234A or section 234B or, as the case may be, section 234C can be considered, are as follows: (a) Where during the course of proceedings for search and seizure under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, or otherwise, the books of account and other incriminating documents have been seized, and the assessee has been unable to furnish the return

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

234A, 234B & 234C of the Income Tax Act. 15. The Appellate authority held, since there was search on 21.10.2003, a notice under Section 153A had to be issued and, earlier when returns filed by him was beyond the period prescribed, a notice under Section 148 and/or 153A was ordered and, therefore, the contention that reopening of the assessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA, M/S BELLARY STEEL ROLING MILLS,

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

234A, 234B & 234C of the Income Tax Act. 15. The Appellate authority held, since there was search on 21.10.2003, a notice under Section 153A had to be issued and, earlier when returns filed by him was beyond the period prescribed, a notice under Section 148 and/or 153A was ordered and, therefore, the contention that reopening of the assessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

234A, 234B & 234C of the Income Tax Act. 15. The Appellate authority held, since there was search on 21.10.2003, a notice under Section 153A had to be issued and, earlier when returns filed by him was beyond the period prescribed, a notice under Section 148 and/or 153A was ordered and, therefore, the contention that reopening of the assessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.MADHAVA (HUF)

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

234A, 234B & 234C of the Income Tax Act. 15. The Appellate authority held, since there was search on 21.10.2003, a notice under Section 153A had to be issued and, earlier when returns filed by him was beyond the period prescribed, a notice under Section 148 and/or 153A was ordered and, therefore, the contention that reopening of the assessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. S.PARVATHI MADHAVA

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.KUMAR,H.S.KEMPANNA

234A, 234B & 234C of the Income Tax Act. 15. The Appellate authority held, since there was search on 21.10.2003, a notice under Section 153A had to be issued and, earlier when returns filed by him was beyond the period prescribed, a notice under Section 148 and/or 153A was ordered and, therefore, the contention that reopening of the assessment

SHRI NARAYAN RAO HEBRI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,K. V. ARAVIND

capital gains and treated the sum of Rs.1,14,20,100/-, so declared, along with the unexplained cash of Rs.24,00,000/-, as income from other sources and subjected the same to tax under Section 115BBE of the I.T. Act. The assessment was completed by order dated 17.07.2019. 4.3 Aggrieved thereby, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner

M/S CANBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

Section 143(1) of the Act was levied at Date of Order 21-08-2017 in W.P.No.7276/2017 M/s.Canbank Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax. 3/13 Rs.20,12,466/-. A waiver application was filed by the petitioner-assessee before the Chief Commissioner. 3. The facts leading to the said partial waiver as narrated in the impugned order