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

132A of the Act. The language of the provision is clear and unambiguous. The Legislation has not imposed any embargo on the Assessing Officer in respect of the stage of proceedings during which the satisfaction is to be reached and recorded in respect of the person other than the searched person. Further Section 158BE(2)(b) only provides

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

68,753 235B – 1,59,97,806 2,90,66,559 13 Total Tax 10,16,70,745 Less: 140A paid 2,00,00,000 Net Amount Payable 8,16,70,745 13. It is further contended by the standing counsel for the appellant, that against the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle

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

Bench: K.SOMASHEKAR,UMESH M ADIGA

132A against a person, who may be referred as 'the searched person'. Based on such search and seizure, assessment proceedings are initiated against the 67 'searched person' under Section 153A. At the time of initiation of such proceedings against the 'searched person' or during the assessment proceedings against him or even after the completion of the assessment proceedings against

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. KENNAMETAL INC,USA

Bench: KRISHNA S DIXIT,RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

68 of 2024 in cases where assessment, reassessment, or recomputation is to be made under Section 147 of the Act, pursuant to reopening under Section 148, such proceedings are required to be completed within one year from the end of the financial year in which the notice under Section 148 was served. Further, in cases of assessment

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, vs. M/S BAHUBALI NEMINATH MUTTIN,

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: ANAND BYRAREDDY,RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

68 of the I.T. Act at Rs.10,72,247/- was confirmed. The addition on account of gross profit on suppressed sales was deleted 5 and the addition under Section 41 (1) was confirmed. That order was challenged by both, the assessee as well as the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessee had raised an additional

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI N LEELA KUMAR

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

132A deals with Power to Requisitioning the Books of Accounts. Chapter 14B is a - 8 - special procedure for assessment of such case. Section 158B defines what a “Block period” is, as well as “undisclosed income”. Section 158BB dealing with undisclosed income reads as under: Computation of undisclosed income of the block period. 158BB. (1) The undisclosed income

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S ATRIA WIND (KADAMBUR) PVT LTD

Bench: CHIEF JUSTICE,C M JOSHI

68,251/- made on account of capital gains. During the previous year relevant to AY 2017-18, a partnership firm namely M/s. Perpetual Investments, was converted into a private company [the assessee]. The said conversion entailed the transfer of the entire assets and liabilities from the partnership firm to the assessee company. Whereas the assessee claimed that the conversion

PRATHIBHA JEWELLERY HOUSE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)

Bench: The Hon'Ble Dr.Justice Vineet Kothari

68 years No.1/1, Raja Ram Mohan Roy Road Richmond Circle Bangalore – 560 025. …Petitioner (By:Mr.A Shankar, Advocate) AND: 1. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Office of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 11, Central Revenue Building Queens Road, Bangalore – 560 001. 2. The Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle, C.R.Building, Queens Road Bangalore – 560 001. 3. The Deputy