PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

11. …… On the contrary, it is expressly provided under Section 153A of the Act the Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

11. …… On the contrary, it is expressly provided under Section 153A of the Act the Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

11. …… On the contrary, it is expressly provided under Section 153A of the Act the Assessing Officer shall assess or reassess

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SMT. G. LAKSHMI ARUNA

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 by bringing to tax all the income which formed part of 6 total income under the original assessment order passed. However, it was noticed that though the assessment proceedings was initiated by issue of notice under Section 143(2), The Tribunal vide said order also knocked down the assessment proceedings completed under

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHRI. GALI JANARDHANA REDDY

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 by bringing to tax all the income which formed part of 5 total income under the original assessment order passed. However, it was noticed that though the assessment proceedings was initiated by issue of notice under Section 143(2), The Tribunal vide said order also knocked down the assessment proceedings completed under

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. M/S C RAMAIAH REDDY

In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in the notice, a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KENNAMETAL INC,USA

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

11. On the other hand, sub-section (3) is applicable to an assessment, reassessment, or recomputation made in consequence of, or to give

M/S MAHESH INVESTMENTS vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 2(28) of the Act has a comprehensive meaning and includes all steps and proceedings taken for determination of tax payable and for imposing liability on the assessee. It includes reassessment as well. Therefore, even after the matter 11

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MAHAVEER CALYX

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

11. Smt. Sujatha, learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection to the request made by Sri. R.V. Prasad, learned Counsel for the appellant company. 12. In view of the request made by the learned Counsel for the appellant company, in our opinion, we need not have to express any opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the impugned order passed

THE PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD

The appeal is dismissed

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

11) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued unless an opportunity of being heard is given to the assessee and the Assessing Officer on such directions which are prejudicial to the interest of the assessee or the interest of the revenue. respectively. (12) No direction under sub-section (5) shall be issued after nine months from

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. BASHIR AHMED ABDIRRAJ AM MATTE

The appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: M.I.ARUN,B. MURALIDHARA PAI

Section 153 of the Act prescribes the time limits for completion of assessment, reassessment or recomputation. 11. Section 153(3) of the Act reads

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

11 Act ceases to be an order for the purposes of Section 264 of the Act. The Supreme Court in RAJESH JHAVERI supra has held that an intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act cannot be treated as an order of assessment. In the instant case, admittedly, no original assessment was made in case of the assessee. The assessee

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S VSL MINING COMPANY PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed as being

Bench: S.G.PANDIT,C.M. POONACHA

11. Further, the Assessing Officer has not recorded his satisfaction with regard to escapement of income. On the other hand, he has based Revenue's case entirely on the statement of assessee. ……” (emphasis supplied) 14. A Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shyam Sunder Khandelwal v. ACT9 has held as follows: “24. In the case

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MAHAVEER CALYX

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for 8 any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. Rule 8D(2) The expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-2 vs. M/S.EYGBS (INDIA) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36360-DB ITA No. 107 of 2025 C/W ITA No. 106 of 2025 (v) "Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal's order can be said as perverse in nature in setting aside disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act by holding that all the investments in mutual funds were

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) vs. SHRI. CHERIAN ABRAHAM

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment proceedings, held that mere omission to mention Section 143 (2) of the Act equally in any one of the notices so issued is held to be not fatal and would not invalidate the assessment order. In that context, it has been held that the Court is not prepared to think that there was absence of notice under Section

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MAJESTIC DEVELOPERS

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. Rule 8D(2) The expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total income

M/S YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

11 intended the assessing officer to reassess complete income then it would have stated in Section 115J that ‘income of the company