SRI N GOVINDARAJU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeal stands disposed of

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

56 yrs, S/o Narayanappa # 101, Divyashree Residency H D Devegowda Road R T Nagar, Bangalore 32 Appellant (By Sri A Shankar, Adv. for Sri V S Yogesh Kumar, Adv.)) And 1 Income Tax Officer Ward 8(2), Bangalore 82 2 Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals II, Bangalore 82 Respondents (By Sri E Sanmathi Indrakumar, Adv.) Appeal is filed under S.260

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

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

reassessment orders. The reasons for not having disclosed such huge taxable turnover is not made known except stating that the same is detected during the periodic review. The periodic review for the years 2005- 2006k, 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, 2009- 2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 has taken place after March 2013. This means

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassess total income of such other 38 person of such assessment year in the manner provided in Section 153A." 54. …2. Several High Courts have held that the provisions of section 153C of the Act are substantially similar/parimateria to the provisions of section 158BD of the Act and therefore, the above guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, apply

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

56 I.T.R. 674.] . The learned judges held that the effect of the decision in Prashar v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas [[1963] 49 I.T.R. (S.C.) 1.] and the later decisions of the Supreme Court was that in so far as the proviso authorises the assessment or reassessment of any person other than the assessee beyond the period of limitation specified in section

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in Section 153A." 54. …2. Several High Courts have held that the provisions of section 153C of the Act are substantially similar/parimateria to the provisions of section 158BD of the Act and therefore, the above guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, apply to proceedings

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

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

56 KLJ 397 (HC) and 'HEWLETT PACKARD FINANCIAL SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS.' LAWS (KAR) 2016 2 146. 10. We have considered the submissions made on both sides and have perused the record. The questions of law which arise for consideration in this petition are as follows: (1) Whether advance ruling dated

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

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

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 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

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

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

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 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

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 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

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

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

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

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

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:

56(2)(viib) of the Act and the same is enumerated as Income in Section 2(24)(xvi) pf the Act. However, what is bought into the ambit of income is the premium received from a resident in excess of the fair market value of the shares. In this case what is being sought to be taxed is capital

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

2) of Section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before the date of receiving the books of account or documents or valuable assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, such Assessing Officer shall issue notice and assess or reassess total income of such other - 47 - person