PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

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

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

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

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S GMR HYDERABAD

Appeals stand disposed of accordingly

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

section makes it clear the assessing officer shall assess or reassess the total income in - 25 - respect of each assessment

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

25 the Act is one and the same and would not alter in respect of both the provisions. The above understanding is further strengthened by the language of section 153C(1) of the Act wherein issue of notice and assess or reassess

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 is provided. Even if the proceedings under section 153C of the Act 25

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS vs. M/S BHARAT HOTELS LIMITED

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

reassessment under Sections 147 and 148 of the Act would be on a completely different footing, and therefore, would not merit consideration. However, keeping in view the fact that the Tribunal, in various decisions, had taken the view that four years period would be a reasonable period of time to initiate action, the Delhi High Court held that where

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

25-A are pending. Under the proviso to section 12(B) (sic), the time limit prescribed under section 12(1) or 12(2) is not applicable for an action to be taken or order assessment or reassessment

M/S T T K PRESTIGE LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mrs.Justice S.Sujatha

reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which - 23 - has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section

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

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

reassessment under Section 21(2) before the addition of the said 12 proviso had expired and as such while reversing the decision of Allahabad High Court, it was held as under: “25

DELL INDIA PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

Section 147 authorises and permits the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income chargeable to tax if he has reason to believe that income for any assessment year has escaped assessment. The word “reason” in the phrase “reason to believe” would mean cause or justification. If the Assessing Officer has cause or justification to know or suppose that income

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIT(A) vs. M/S HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBALSOFT PVT LTD

Appeals are hereby dismissed by

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

reassessed. To confer jurisdiction under Section 147(a) two conditions were required to be satisfied firstly the Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that income profits or gains 22 chargeable to income- tax have escaped assessment, and secondly he must also have reason to believe that such escapement has occurred by reason of either (i) omission or failure