M/S KAKKAR COMPLEX STEELS (P) LTDE vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF IT

Appeal is allowed and

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SWARAJ ENGINES LTD MOHALI

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI,MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

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 of the proceedings under this section, or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in sections

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), GURGAON vs. M/S DHG MARKETING PVT.LTD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

1) along with questionnaire were issued, which were duly replied by AJAY PRASHER 2023.06.02 09:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document ITA No.56 of 2019 (O&M) 2023:PHHC:077580-DB -2- the assessee. After considering the replies filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition amounting to Rs.4.15 crores, under Section

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JALANDHAR vs. M/S SUPERTECH FORGINGS PVT LTD

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Reassessment proceedings were initiated under Sections 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The respondent-assessee had made bogus purchases of Rs.4.26 crores by inflating the expenses and thereby suppressed the profits by Rs.4.26 crores for the AY 2010-2011. 4. The bogus purchases were reflected by the statements of Sh. Madan Lal Pahuja and Jatinder Kumar before the Investigating

HRY WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF IT

Bench: MR. JUSTICE AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL,MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

section 147 would give arbitrary powers to the Assessing Officer 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 Assessing Officer has no power to review; he has the power to reassess