PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL 3 vs. ABHISAR BUILDWELL P. LTD

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

income declared in the returns; and iv) in case no incriminating material is unearthed during the search, the AO cannot assess or reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no addition

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX vs. HINDUSTAN BULK CARRIERS

The appeals are allowed to the extent indicated above

reassessment, tax shall be calculated on the aggregate of the total income as assessed in the earlier proceeding for assessment under section 143 or section 144 or section 147 and the income disclosed in the application as if such aggregate were the total income. (1C) The additional

M/S. MANGALAM PUBLICATIONS, KOTTAYAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTTAYAM

Bench: This Court & On Leave Being Granted, Civil Appeals Have Been Registered. 3.

addition of Rs.1,50,000.00 was made to the total income of the assessee vide the assessment order dated 29.01.2022 passed under Section 143 (3) of the Act. 10. For the assessment year 1992-1993 also, the assessee filed the return of income on 07.12.1992 showing a loss of Rs.10,50,000.00. However, a revised return was filed subsequently

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,CHENNAI vs. M/S ALAGENDRAN FINANCE LTD

addition to that item or items which have led to the issuance of notice under Section 148 and where ressessment is made under Section 147 in respect of income which has escaped tax, the Income Tax Officer’s jurisdiction is confined to only such income which has escaped tax or has been under-assessed and does not extend to revising

SUNDARAM & COMPANY (P.) LTD. MADURAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MADRAS

reassessment could be initiated on the ground that income had been assessed at too low a rate. Counsel for the Company contends that the High Court was in error in proceeding to enlarge the scope of the enquiry and in entering upon a question which was never mooted before the Tribunal. Section 2 of the Finance Act, 1956, provides insofar

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

additional income tax at the rate of 20% on the distributed income”. For the purpose of considering whether there is any such appellate remedy, we must note the concerned Sections in the Act dealing with appellate remedy and provisions touching upon exercise of such right of appeal. Sections 246(1) and 246A(1) being relevant for the present purposes

INCOME TAX OFFICER vs. VIKRAM SUJITKUMAR BHATIA

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in Section 153-A.” 4.1 It is submitted by Shri Nataraj, learned ASG that the amendment in Section 153C was necessitated in view of the observation of the Delhi High Court in the case of Pepsico India Holdings Private Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

R. S. A. C. KASI IYER vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, MYSORE, TRAVANCORE-COCH

additional tax. The Union Legislature enacted on April 17, 1950, the Opium and Revenue Laws (Extension of Application) Act providing for the extension of certain opium and revenue laws to certain parts of India. By s. 2 of that Act, amongst others, the Taxation on Income (Investigation Commission) Act, XXX of 1947 (enacted by the Central Legislature) and all rules

A.L.A. FIRM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MADRAS

reassessment. [639E-640B] The material on which the Income Tax Officer has taken action is a judicial decision. This had been pronounced just a few months earlier to the original assessment and it is not difficult see that the Income Tax Officer must have missed it or else he could not have completed the assessment as he did. Indeed

COMNR. OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. M/S DAMANI BROTHERS

The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above

addition to powers exercisable by the income-tax authorities. With reference to Anjum’s case (supra) it was submitted that specific power of waiver is given to the concerned authority and, therefore, interest charged can be waived. There cannot be double levy of interest and when interest is charged under Section 245D(2C)/6A interest under Section 234B cannot

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX-CUM-WEALTH TAX CIRCLE II, vs. NAWAB MIR BARKAT ALI KHAN BAHADUR

In the result, these appeals fail and are dismissed with

reassess such income for the assessment year concerned. The High court held. that the reasons assigned for reopening the assessments did not fall within the scope of omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts, that all the material facts were before the Department 15-255 Sup.Cl/75 468 when

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RAJESH JHAVERI STOCK BROKERS PVT.LTD

The appeal is allowed without

Additionally, section 148 as presently stands is differently couched in language from what was earlier the position. Prior to the substitution by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, the provision read as follows: \023148. Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment.\027(1) Before making the assessment, reassessment

MANSAROVAR COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.R. SHAH

Additional Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the Revenue. He has taken us through the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order, findings of the CIT(A) vide order dated 30th March, 2001, findings recorded by the ITAT vide order dated 8th January, 2002 and the findings recorded by the High Court including the findings

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CALCUTTA vs. BIDHU BHUSHAN SARKAR (DEAD) THROUGH HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATI

reassessment could be issued, had no substance. It was further held that the Income-tax Officer had passed the order "no proceeding" and such an order, in the circumstances of the case, meant that the Income-tax Officer accepted the return and assessed the income as ’nil’. In that case, thus, the order "no proceeding" was interpreted in the light

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MADRAS vs. S. K.HABIBULLAH, MADRAS

Additional Income- Tax Officer, Nellore that cl. (5), of s. 35 of the Indian Income-tax Act, which was enacted by the Income Tax, (Amendment) Act, 1953, was not declaratory of pre-existing law, and as it clearly affected vested right which had accrued to the assessee, must be deemed to have come into force from April

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NAGESWARA RAO

addition, it was claimed that the assessing officer had no valid reasons to 6 7 believe that the income of the assessee had escaped assessment. According to the assessee the assessment officer had accepted the   genuineness   of   the   transaction   wherein   NNPLC,   the subsidiary,   had   issued   convertible   bonds   which   had   been subscribed by many entities.   It was urged that the assessing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, AZAMGARH & ANR. vs. MEWALAL DWARKA PRASAD & VICE VERSA

reassessment under s. 34 of the earlier Act of 1922 and came to hold: "When a notice is issued under s. 34 based on a certain item of income that had escaped assessment, it is permissible for the Income- tax authorities to include other items in the assessment, in addition

ROSHAN-DI-HATTI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Reassessment-Burden of proof about source of income--Finding of facts of the Tribunal can be interfered under what circumstances---Conclusion without any materi- als-No person acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant law would come to determination--Income tax Appellate Tribunal--Whether Tribunal can ask questions to assessee informally--Whether part of record--Income Tax Appellate