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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

1) of Section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub- section (2) of Section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

1) of Section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub- section (2) of Section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S MPHASIS LIMITED

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice M. Nagaprasanna

reassessment or recomputation under sub-section (3) of section 143 or section 144 or section 147 or] [ Section 153- A or clause (c) of Section 158-BC]] unless the reasons for retaining the same are recorded by him in writing and the approval of the [Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner], [Principal Commissioner or Commissioner], [Principal Director General or Director

WIPRO LIMITED vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Krishna S.Dixit Writ Petition No.20040/2019 (T-It) Between:

142(1) and it culminates with the issuance of the notice of demand u/s. 156. The making of the order of assessment is, therefore, an integral part of the process of assessment...” (iv) In CIT v. Purshottamdas T. Patel [1994] 209 ITR 52 (Guj), the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat has observed that 17 section 153 requires that

DEVAS MULTIMEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice P.B. Bajanthri Writ Petition No.11618 Of 2016 (T-It) Between:

142(4) of the Act. In the process of assessment, a reference was made to the Transfer Presiding Officer (TPO) under Section 92CA of the Act. Certain information were sought from the petitioner in order to meet the assessment process. Petitioner is stated to have completed the requisite material sought by the authorities. Thereafter, several inquiries were made

THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1) of Section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub- section (2) of Section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1) of Section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub- section (2) of Section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

1) of Section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub- section (2) of Section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment

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

reassessment Section 2(40) "regular assessment" means the assessment made under sub- section (3) of] section 143 or section 144. 234A (1) Where the return of income for any assessment year under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4) of section 139, or in response to a notice under sub- section (1) of section 142

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

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

142[1] was issued on 12.09.2013 calling the assessee to file the return. Reply was filed on 08.10.2013 by the assessee stating that the return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 was already filed on 26.09.2012 enclosing the copy of the same for ready reference. Subsequently, notice under Section - 10 - 143[2] was issued on 21.10.2013. Financial year

DELL INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

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

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

1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year. - 53 - Provided further that nothing contained in the first proviso shall apply in a case where any income in relation to any asset [including financial interest in any entity] located outside India, chargeable

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 as specified in sub-section (2) of section 153, every such notice referred to in this clause shall be deemed to be a valid notice. Explanation.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing contained in the first proviso or the second proviso shall apply to any return which has 12 been furnished

JEANS KNIT PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Ram Mohan Reddy Writ Petition No.13174/2013 (T-It)

142(1) of the Act, Annexures-E and F and for a writ of mandamus to stay all further proceedings pursuant to the notices, Annexures-E and F. 2. Facts briefly stated are: petitioner is a 100% export oriented unit engaged in manufacture and export of high-fashion designer jeans having its registered 3 office in the State of Karnataka

XIAOMI TECHNOLOGY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:

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

142(1) of the I.T.Act for the Assessment Year 2018-19 inter alia calling upon the petitioner to show cause, as to why payment of royalty to the foreign entity i.e., Qualcomm and Beijing Xiaomi Mobile should not be disallowed. On 10.08.2022, petitioner submitted a detailed response along with documents and contested the said Notice and proceedings

THE PRL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SUNITA BAI

Bench: SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR,RAGHVENDRA S. CHAUHAN

142(1) accompanied with a questionnaire was also issued to the assessee on 10.08.2009. In response to the said notice, the assessee appeared before the Assessing Officer. The assessee was asked to explain the receipt of Rs.45,00,000/- by way of gift from Hasim Mod Trading Establishment, Dubai. Despite the explanation given by the assessee, the Assessing Officer

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year:” 14.3 As per the proviso to section 147 of the Act, where an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act has been made in any assessment year and if after expiry of four years from

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) vs. M/S POST & BSNL EMPLOYEES

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

1) of section 142 or section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment for that assessment year:” 14.3 As per the proviso to section 147 of the Act, where an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act has been made in any assessment year and if after expiry of four years from