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:

reassessment, there was no need for the Parliament to employ the two terms, simultaneously; Lord Hewart C.J. in Spillers Limited Vs. Caradix Assessment Committee & Pritchard, (1931) All E.R. 524 stated: “It ought to be the rule… that words are used in an Act of Parliament correctly and exactly and not loosely and not inexactly…”; section 2 i.e., the Dictionary Clause

M/S JMC PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

2) of Section 21 before the addition of the said proviso had expired. Here, it is the completion of assessment or reassessment under Section 21 which is to be done before the expiration of 8 years of that particular assessment year. Read as it is, these provisions would mean that the assessment for the year 1985-86 could

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

31 Clause 2 of the MLA by the appellant. Clause 3 of the MLA defines the acceptance certificate and the same has to be issued to the appellant in the format of Exhibit – B as prescribed in the MLA. Only after issuance of acceptance certificate, the ‘Lease Schedule’ comes into existence. The end customer places purchase order

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

reassess any other income which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice during the course of the proceedings. However, if after issuing a notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe 23 had escaped assessment, has as a matter of fact

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. Further the Delhi High Court has not specifically held that the period of six assessment years would be difference for the purpose of section 28 153A and 153C of the Act. Assuming without admission if the contention of the assessee that period

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. Further the Delhi High Court has not specifically held that the period of six assessment years would be difference for the purpose of section 153A and 153C of the Act. Assuming without admission if the contention of the assessee that period

SRI AVINASH LALA CHANDANI vs. SRI P A NIRANJAN

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice A.V.Chandrashekara

reassess the evidence placed before the Court if material evidence is either ignored or misinterpreted or law has been misapplied to the facts of the case. 13. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s.Bhoolchand and Anr. vs. M/s.Kay Pee Cee Investments and Anr. (AIR 1991 SC 2053) has held 15 that the power of revision under Section

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), if any tax is, not paid by a 28 dealer who has failed to get registered though liable to do so or fraudulently evaded attracting punishment under Section 79, an assessment or reassessment may be made within eight years from the end of the prescribed tax period. Provided that an assessment

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal

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. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in quashing the assessment order by relying on the judgment of this Hon’ble High Court in the case of CIT V/s. Lancy Constructions [383 I TR 168]?” In ITA Nos.197/2021 to 199/2021: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal