AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar

deduction, allowance or relief in the return; (d) where a person is found to have any asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India. Explanation 3.—For the purpose of assessment or reassessment

M/S BHORUKA POWER CORPORATION LTD vs. FORMERLY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

In the result, this appeal is allowed

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,C.M. POONACHA

deductions claimed under Section 80IA of the Act and accordingly set aside the assessment order. The Assessing Authority has passed reassessment

THE SRI KANNIKAPARAMESWARI CO OP BANK LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

reassessment. Where, however, the Income- tax Officer had not considered the material and subsequently come by the material from the record itself, then such a case would fall within the scope of Section 147(b) of the Act. (emphasis supplied) The aforesaid observations are complete answer to the submission that if a particular subject matter, item, deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

THE PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

THE PR. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. M/S. DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PVT. LTD.,

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

reassessment. Where, however, the Income- tax Officer had not considered the material and subsequently come by the material from the record itself, then such a case would fall within the scope of Section 147(b) of the Act. (emphasis supplied) The aforesaid observations are complete answer to the submission that if a particular subject matter, item, deduction

M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

reassessment proceedings for bringing to 17 tax items which had escaped assessment, it would be open to an assessee to put forward claims for deduction

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

reassessment order itself as being without jurisdiction, was justified in adjudicating on the merits and remanding the matter to the Assessing officer for computation of deduction

HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

reassessment order itself as being without jurisdiction, was justified in adjudicating on the merits and remanding the matter to the Assessing officer for computation of deduction

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

deducted TDS and deposited the same with the Department, was also not raised at that stage. The law provides for time limit for completion of assessments and reassessments