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

U/S 148A(d) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ANNEXURE-A AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DsAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:- ORDER In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: “ (i) Quashing the impugned order dated: 28.07.2022 bearing ITBA/COM/F/17/2022- 23/1044214522(1) passed by Respondent No.1 under

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S CHAITANYA PROPERTIES PVT LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,JAYANT PATEL

147 would give arbitrary powers to the AO to reopen assessments on the basis of "mere change of opinion", which cannot be per se reason to reopen. We must also keep in mind the conceptual difference between power to review and power to reassess. The AO has no power to review; he has the power to reassess. But reassessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) vs. M/S POST & BSNL EMPLOYEES

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

147 would give arbitrary powers to the AO to reopen assessments on the basis of "mere change of opinion", which cannot be per se reason to reopen. We must also keep in mind the conceptual difference between power to review and power to reassess. The AO has no power to review; he has the power to reassess. But reassessment

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

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr.Justice Aravind Kumar

II R 2 LARGE TAX PAYERS UNIT (LTU) JSS TOWERS, 100 FEET RING ROAD, BANASHANKARI III STAGE, BENGALURU-560085 ..RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.K.V.ARAVIND, PANEL ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO: DECLARE THAT THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 148 OF THE ACT ARE WITHOUT

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

u/s 10A. Consequent short levy of tax and surcharge works out to Rs.1,76,39,326/-. Therefore, I have reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the Ay 2003-04”. 14 As per Section 147 of the Act, if the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment

THE SRI KANNIKAPARAMESWARI CO OP BANK LIMITED vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

143(3) r/w Section 147 of the Act was concluded on 31.12.2009 by determining the total income of the appellant at Rs.44,53,500/- as against the ‘nil’ income filed by the appellant. Being aggrieved, the assessee/appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Bengaluru, - 4 - who partly allowed the appeal. However, being aggrieved

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

Appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET SARAN

143(3) of the Act on 28.2.2005, which was within the period prescribed under Section 153 of the Act. Besides this, the return of income of the assessee for the relevant assessment year 2002-03 was also filed and accepted by the Revenue, in which the aforesaid payments to KKFHPL were reflected. At no stage the question of deduction

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

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 38 person of such assessment

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

II) CIT vs. IBC Knowledge Park(P) Ltd., held as under: “46. 153C is relevant for the purposes of this case. Sub-section (1) of Section 153C begins with a non- obstante clause and it states that notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any valuable assets, seized

M/S THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE APEX BANK vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

ii) ALLOW THE APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT, 'C' BENCH, BENGALURU IN ITA NO.1372/BANG/2014 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 29.02.2016. THIS I.T.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

U/s 147 11. Section 147 of the Act empowers the assessing officer to assess or reassess such income which is chargeable to tax as escaped assessment for any assessment year, if he has reason to believe that such income has escaped assessment. The proviso to Section 147 of the Act, however, provides that where an assessment under Section 143(3

NOVO NORDISK INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 12 (2

Bench: S.SUJATHA

u/s 143(3) of the Act inter alia accepting the conclusions of the TPO. It appears after lapse of close to six years from the end of relevant Assessment Year, by the impugned notice dated 28.3.2013 issued under Section 148 of the Act respondent No.1 initiated re-assessment proceedings for the subject Assessment Year on the ground that the income

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

3) was not - 42 - passed, an intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 28/03/2007 which fact is noted in the order 31/12/2010 passed under Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act. The Tribunal held that for the purpose of Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act, an intimation under Section 143(1) is also an order of assessment

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

3) was not - 42 - passed, an intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 28/03/2007 which fact is noted in the order 31/12/2010 passed under Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act. The Tribunal held that for the purpose of Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act, an intimation under Section 143(1) is also an order of assessment

THE COMMISIONER 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

3) was not - 42 - passed, an intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 28/03/2007 which fact is noted in the order 31/12/2010 passed under Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act. The Tribunal held that for the purpose of Section 153A r/w 153C of the Act, an intimation under Section 143(1) is also an order of assessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GMR HOLDINGS PVT LTD.,

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

ii) set aside the common appellate order passed by the ITAT, ‘A’ bench, Bengaluru in ITA No.1006/Bang/2010 dated 31.10.2011, as sought for in this appeal, in the interest of justice and equity. This I.T.A. coming on for Final Hearing this day, Dr. Vineet Kothari J. delivered the following:- JUDGMENT Mr.E.I. Sanmathi, Adv. for Appellants- Revenue Mr.K.S. Ramabadran, Adv. for Respondent

P ARVIND MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course

P VIKRAM MAIYA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Accordingly, writ petition is allowed

Bench: S.SUJATHA

147. If the Assessing Officer has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year, he may, subject to the provisions of sections 148 to 153, assess or reassess such income and also any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which comes to his notice subsequently in the course