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:

45 15. Issue of allocation of corporate overhead to section 80IC unit beyond what was already allocated by the assessee was held in favour of the assessee. 16. Issue of eligibility of other income for deduction u/s. 80IC was held against the assessee. 17. Issue of allocation of corporate overhead to section 80IAB beyond what was already allocated

SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

section 45(2) of the Act and denying the benefit of indexation. The reassessment was completed on 4 total income

SMT. TARA N. A vs. SRI. SYED JAKIR

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,ASHOK G.NIJAGANNAVAR

45. Transport vehicle has been defined in section 2(47) of the Act, to mean a public service vehicle, a goods carriage, an educational institution bus or a private service vehicle. Public service vehicle has been defined in section 2(35) to mean any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage of passengers for hire

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SHASTHA PHARMA LABORATORIES

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

reassessment on that ground. Secondly, he contended that by the deed of retirement, the firm was dissolved. Two partners took money value and the assessee took over the entire assets which included the immovable property like land and building etc. Therefore, the case squarely falls under Section 45(4) of the Act and at any rate it falls within

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

45 which has led to the specific import. Whether the actual sale takes place before the import or after the import is irrelevant is this context”. If the same test is applied in the present context, then it could be seen that the appellant has not imported goods/equipments from foreign vendor but it is the end customer’s purchase order

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

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 of any person other than the assessee beyond the period of limitation specified in section 34, it violates the provisions of article 14 of the Constitution and is invalid: but the proviso was valid to the extent of its operation against the assessees who are parties to the proceedings. This judgment was rendered on September 16, 1964. The next

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 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

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 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