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

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

5) In computing the period of limitation for the purpose of sub-section (2), any period, during which any proceeding under this Section is stayed by an order or injunction of any court, shall be excluded. (6) For the purposes of this Section, ‘record’ shall include all records relating to any proceedings under this Act available at the time

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

5(2) of the CST Act, the concerned transactions are nothing but ‘sale’ falling under Section 2(29) of the KVAT Act 2003 and the turnovers qualifies as taxable turnover as per Section 2(34) of the KVAT Act and thus chargeable for VAT in the State. 21. Coming to the issue of levy of penalty and interest

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SAHAKARNAGAR CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD

Appeals are allowed in part

Bench: B.MANOHAR,VINEET SARAN

reassessment orders in view of the FWA, exempting the appellants from payment of taxes. The learned single Judge, driving the appellants to approach the respondent No.1 for necessary benefits, is contrary to the terms and conditions stipulated in the FWA and accordingly seeks for setting aside the Judgment and order passed by the learned single Judge and to allow

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

21 of show-cause notice or passing of order under section 148A” are inserted. 4. Despite the substituted sections 147 to 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Finance Act, 2021 coming into force on 1st April, 2021, according to learned ASG, the Revenue issued approximately 90,000 reassessment notices to the respective assessees under the erstwhile sections

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

reassessment as the case may be." 18. The dispute in this petition pertains to tax periods April 2006 to March 2008 and as on the date of re- assessment, the time limit for re-assessment for the disputed period was as under: Tax period Period of limitation Due date for completion of re-assessment April 2006 to March 5 years

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 vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

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

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

5. Learned counsel for the Revenue argued that the conditions for issuance of notice under Section 153A of the Act being well settled, merely on the ground that no incriminating material was seized by the Department, the proceedings initiated under Section 153A of the Act cannot be held to be unjustifiable; the finding of the Tribunal, runs contrary

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

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:

21 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year, proceedings for which have been completed before the 1st day of July, 2012. 3. On the date specified in the notice under sub-section (2), or as soon thereafter