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:

22 before 1-6-2016 153(8) Revival of order passed u/s. 153A(2) or 153(1) 1 month from the end of month of revival or within 21 months from the date of authorization - for search has been issued – whichever is earlier. Further, Explanation 1 below section 153 provides that in computing the period of limitation, time taken

SHRI. SUMIR J. HINDUJA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 147 are satisfied? (5) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any reliable and cogent material in the recording u/s 148(2) of the Assessing Officer to initiate reassessment proceedings? (6) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the funds provided to the associate concerns

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 made on the assessee or any person in consequence of, or to give effect to any finding, direction or order made under sections 20, 21, 22, (22A), 23 or 24 or any judgment or order made by the Supreme Court, the High Court, or any other court.” 3. The wording in section 12-A(2

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

reassess any issue relevant to income which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of proceedings under this section, notwithstanding that the reason for such issue has not been included in the reasons recorded under sub-section (2) of S.148. 47.4: Applicability – This amendment has been made applicable with retrospective effect from 1st April, 1989 and will apply accordingly

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

22-A(2) of the KST Act or could have been challenged by the respondent in a writ petition before this Court. However, the respondent has not chosen to challenge the same. In other words, the order dated 31.03.2006 passed by the ACAR is in existence and has attained finality 23 and binds the parties. The aforesaid order is neither

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

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

22 as under: “14. In order to decide in the present appeals whether the sale by the appellant has occasioned the movement of goods from the foreign vendor in the course of import, it is necessary to analyze the Master Lease Agreement (MLA), Purchase order placed by the end customer on the foreign vendor, ‘Lease Schedule’ and the Acceptance Certificate

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

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

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment is under Section 148 of the Act, but such jurisdiction is subject to further compliance as being stipulated in the statute itself and thus, quashed the assessment being invalid. It is a well settled legal principle that issuance of notice beyond period of limitation or absence of notice goes to - 19 - the root of the matter

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

2 SCC 433). The Supreme Court had expressly upheld the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Saumya Construction (P) Ltd. : 2016 SCC Online Guj 9976 and the decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Kabul Chawla : 2015 SCC Online Del 11555 holding that no reassessment under Section 153A or 153C could be done in absence

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 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

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 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