M/S B L KASHYAP & SONS LTD vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL

Bench: S.SUJATHA

17. Accordingly, the impugned orders are quashed with liberty to the Respondent No.2 to proceed with the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 39[2

HEWLETT PACKARD FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

17. The appellant submits that the transactions effected by him squarely fits into the factual matrix prevailing in the Karnataka Bank Limited case cited supra decided by the Hon’ble Madras High Court by its judgment dated 30th September 2011. The factual matrix available has been narrated by her lordship at paragraphs Nos. 10 and 11 of the said decision

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

2) can be challenged or is subject to judicial scrutiny, in our view, the assessment or reassessment of ‘any other income’ in the case of a validly issued notice cannot be said to be a case of fishing and roving enquiry. The assessee has the opportunity to challenge the notice, and if it is held to be invalid

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

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

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S BIOPLUS LIFE SCIENCES PVT LTD

In the result, I pass the following:-

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S.R.Krishna Kumar Writ Petition No.1014 Of 2017 (T-Kst) Between: M/S. Rainbow Colour Lab, No.13, D.J.C. Complex, Hudson Circle, Bengaluru – 560 027. A Partnership Firm Represented By Its Partner Sri.G.K.Madan Mohan, Aged About 62 Years, S/O Sri.G.V.Krishna Reddy. ...Petitioner (By Sri. M.Thirumalesh, Advocate ) And: 1. State Of Karnataka

reassessment but subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), at any time within a period of eight years from the expiry of the year to which the tax relates, proceed to assess or re-assess to the best of its judgment the tax payable by the dealer in respect of such turnover after issuing a notice to the dealer

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

17. Section 40 of the Act, which deals with period of limitation for assessment, prior to its amendment reads as under: "40. Period of limitation for assessment.- (1) An assessment under Section 38 or re- assessment under Section 39 of an amount of tax due for any prescribed tax period shall not be made after the following time limits

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

The appeal is dismissed

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

reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer with the prior approval of the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as provided in sub-section (12) of section 144BA.] (14B) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification in the Official Gazette, for the purposes of issuance of directions by the dispute resolution panel, so as to impart greater efficiency, transparency

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

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

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under Section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding.” 16. In the decision of E.N.Gopakumar V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) [(2016) 75 - 36 - Taxxman.com 215 (Kerala)], the Hon’ble High Court