AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, I pass the following:-

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

6. It cannot be disputed that by substitution of sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act (IT Act) by the Finance Act, 2021, radical and reformative changes are made governing the procedure for reassessment proceedings. Amended sections 147 to 149 and section 151 of the IT Act prescribe the procedure governing initiation of reassessment proceedings. However, for several

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 to be completed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147, notice under Section 143(2) has to be issued within the prescribed limit. It was further held that no notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued, therefore, the proceedings are vitiated in law. However, the revenue was granted the liberty to take appropriate curative steps

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA

reassessment proceedings. Such being the position, the order passed by the Respondent No.2 on 16.08.2014 dropping the proceedings initiated under Section 39[2] of the Act ceases to exist. The Respondent No.1 initiating proceedings under Section 63-A[1] of the Act, to revise - 8 - the order dated 16.08.2014 passed by the Respondent No.2 is nullity and without authority

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

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

6) For the purposes of this Section, ‘record’ shall include all records relating to any proceedings under this Act available at the time of examination by the Joint Commissioner.” Clause(a) of Sub-section(2) of the said Section provides for when the said power can be exercised by the Joint Commissioner and Clause(b) of sub-section(2) provides

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

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

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

2) of the Act and denying the benefit of indexation. The reassessment was completed on 4 total income of Rs.29,90,672/-, which was for reasons other than the one recorded in the notice. During the relevant period, the assessee had sold a plot of land measuring 12,430 sq. ft. for a consideration of Rs.74,58,000/-. The property

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

6) There must be either a single sale which itself causes the import or is in the progress or process of import or though there may appear to be two sale transactions they are so integrally inter-connected that they almost resemble one transaction so that the movement of goods from a foreign country to India can be ascribed

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

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

6. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record. 7. Section 143[2] and the proviso therein reads thus: “143(2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Assessing Officer or the prescribed income-tax authority

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

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

6. Insofar as the jurisdiction to reassess the income under Section 153A of the Act, without any incriminating material being found is concerned; the said issue is covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Abhisar Buildwell (P) Ltd. : ( [2024] 2

S N SIMHA vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

In the result there is no merit in this writ petition and the

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice Anand Byrareddy Writ Petition No. 24840 Of 2012 (La-Kiadb) Between: 1. S.N.Simha, Aged About 73 Years, Son Of Late G.R.Swamy, 2. S.N.Yamuna Devi, Wife Of Sri. S.N.Simha, Aged About 66 Years, Both Are Proprietors M/S. Viswabandhu Press & Sree Bharathi Cottage Industries Company, No.16, 1St Cross, Cottonpet, Bangalore – 560 053. …Petitioners (By Shri. S.P.Shankar, Senior Advocate For Shri. K.L.Sreenivas, Advocate For M/S. K.N.L. Associates) And: 1. The State Of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary, Commerce & Industries

6 declaring that the land belonged to the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board, the second respondent herein. It was later learnt on further enquiries that the State Government, respondent no.1 herein, had issued a Notification under Section 3 of the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966, (Hereinafter referred to as the ‘KIADB Act’ for brevity) dated 9-3-2007, duly

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 ORDERS PASSED UNDER KST ACT, 1957 FOR THE YEARS 1998-99 TO 2004-05 BY THE ASST.COMMISSIONER - 2 - OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (A & R) – 4.9, BANGALORE, R-3 HEREIN, DATED 15.04.2016 IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER VIDE ANNEXURES-K, L, M, N, P, Q & R & ETC., THIS W.P. IS BEING HEARD AND RESERVED ON 24.11.2022 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT

M/S. THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

reassessment under Section 147, not a case for rectification wherein the tax liability has been enhanced. 6. Learned counsel for the revenue justifying the orders of the authorities submitted that Section 80 of the Act provides for submission of return for losses. In terms of the said Section, it is mandatory that the return for losses has to be filed

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

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:

2), or as soon thereafter as may be, after hearing such evidence as the assessee may produce including any information or documents referred to in sub- section (3) of Section 92D and after considering such evidence as the Transfer Pricing Officer may require on any specified points and after taking into account all relevant materials which he has gathered

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 vs. RAJKUMAR C (HUF)

In the result, the order passed by the

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

reassessment or recomputation in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in an order passed by any authority in any proceeding under this Act by way of appeal, reference or revision 1 or by a court in any proceeding under any other law]. Explanation 2 - for the purposes of this section, where, by an order

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

6. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that decision of the ACAR was affirmed by the Commissioner by an order dated 19.07.2011 and liberty was granted to the Assessing Officer to examine the transactions to decide the question of exigibility of tax in case of deviation in the factual matrix. It is further submitted that since there

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

2) provides that when the assessment made under Section 153(A)(1) is annulled, the assessment or reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 12. Once it is held that the assessment finalized on 29.12.2000 has attained finality, then the deduction allowed under section 80 HHC of the Income-tax Act as well as the loss computed under the assessment