M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.13 To 17/Pun/2024

147 of the Act which was reopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh tangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking the fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly examined during the course of original assessment proceedings and thus, the said reassessment order deserves to be quashed and set aside

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

147 of the Act which was reopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh tangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking the fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly examined during the course of original assessment proceedings and thus, the said reassessment order deserves to be quashed and set aside

M/S ACCORD MEDIPLUS PVT LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

147 of the Act which was reopened based on the change on opinion without bringing any fresh tangible material on record and thereby further erred in overlooking the fact that the issue of taxation of share premium was duly examined during the course of original assessment proceedings and thus, the said reassessment order deserves to be quashed and set aside

GULAB L. BODKE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 10(2),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

55A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not mandatory and failing which the impugned assessment was valid in eyes of law.” Additional ground filed on 20-06-2018 “The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO of relying on an independent Valuation Report in case of some other assessee for the purpose of adopting