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

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

reopening the issue for the - 10 - current Assessment Year 2009-10 fortifies that it is nothing but the change of opinion made by the AO. Learned Counsel argued that there must be consistency in the orders of the Authorities passed while exercising quasi judicial functions. For the previous years as well as for the subsequent years, the assessments are concluded

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

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

price of Rs.50.12/- lakhs did not amount to a transfer and consequently, no capital gains tax was liable to be paid.?” 7. However, before commencement of the arguments, learned Counsel for the revenue sought the permission of the Court to raise additional substantial question of law : “Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding the reopening of assessment

M/S PATEL MARIGOWDA AND BROS., vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,K.SREEDHAR RAO

transfer, section 45(4) can apply to levy capital gains on such distribution? Without prejudice whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of section 45(4) are applicable to the assessee firm for the assessment year 96- 97? Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 vs. M/S TALLY INDIA PVT LTD

In the result, we do not find

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Transfer Pricing Officer by an order dated 13.06.2012 after affording an opportunity to the assessee passed an draft order of assessment on 05.07.2012 and forwarded the same to the assessee on 11.07.2012. The assessee filed an objection before the Dispute Resolution Panel on 09.08.2012. Thereafter, the Dispute Resolution Panel passed an order on 22.04.2013. The Assessing Officer passed a final

MRS ANITA GOVERDHAN LOEBBERT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeals are allowed;

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,G BASAVARAJA

reopening of the assessment and the consequent assessment proceedings are valid in law on the facts and circumstance of the case? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not adjudicating the issue of cost of the capital asset on 01.04.1981 and consequential indexed cost of acquisition to be allowed on the facts and circumstances of the case

MRS MONIKA GOVERDHAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Appeals are allowed;

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,G BASAVARAJA

reopening of the assessment and the consequent assessment proceedings are valid in law on the facts and circumstance of the case? 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in not adjudicating the issue of cost of the capital asset on 01.04.1981 and consequential indexed cost of acquisition to be allowed on the facts and circumstances of the case

SRI B V S MURTHY vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

The appeal is disposed of

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,RAVI V HOSMANI

reopening for the Assessment Years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 held that stock option cannot be assessed as perquisite. It was further held that the gains could be assessed only as capital gains and the appellant was the owner of shares that were sold for more than 12 months. Being aggrieved, the revenue filed an appeal. The tribunal vide impugned

M/S PADMINI PRODUCTS (P) LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the aforesaid

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

reopened under Section 147 of the Act on the ground that during the course of the proceeding for Assessment Year 2007-08, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that assessee had made claim of depreciation on intangible assets, which was not in accordance with Section 32(1) of the Act. Thereafter, a notice under Section

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOLDMAN SACHS SERVICES PVT LTD

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice V. Srishananda Civil Revision Petition No.29/2019 Between

transferred from IDBI Bank to Akash Ranka’s account in Karur Vysya Bank as an interim measure to enable the firm to pay the outstanding bills for smooth functioning of the work. 35 28. Such an admission in the statement of objection would be sufficient enough to hold that there was misdeed committed by the first respondent detrimental

M/S.V S LAD & SONS vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S GARUDADHRI IMPEX PVT. LTD.,., vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S KARIGANUR MINERAL MINING INDUSTRY vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

SMT K M PARVATHAMMA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S.HIND TRADERS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S CANARA MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

SRI H G RANGANGOUD vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S M HANUMANTH RAO vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred

M/S NADEEM MINERALS, vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & OTHERS

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,SUBHRO KAMAL MUKHARJEE (AG.CJ)

transferred from Entry 19 of List II (State List) of Seventh Schedule of the Constitution to Entry 17A of List III (Concurrent List) of the said Schedule and on the enforcement of Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 (hereinafter, referred to as ‘F.C. Act’, for the sake of convenience) and the provisions made under the Environment (Protection Act), 1986 (hereinafter, referred