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

The appeal is allowed without

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

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

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

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. M/S. KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) CIRCLE 1(2) vs. M/S M.R. SHAH LOGISTICS PVT. LTD

Appeal is allowed in these terms, without order on costs

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment

PARASHURAM POTTERY WORKS CO. LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1, WARD 'A', RAJKOT,GUJARAT

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assess- ment

INDIAN AND EASTERN NEWSPAPER SOCIETY NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

reassess such income or recompute the loss or the depreciation allowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(CENTRAL) vs. M/S. GWALIOR RAYON SILK MFG.(WVG.)CO.LTD

The appeal is partly allowed

depreciation on roads and drains in the original assessment for the assessment year 1973-74 C.I.T. set aside order of the I.T.O. under Section 263. Reassessment

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PATIALA & ORS. vs. M/s. SHAHZADA NAND & SONS & ORS

In the result, the order of the High Court is set aside and

depreciation allowance has been computed, he may in cases falling under clause (a) at any time ................ serve on the assessee................ a notice containing all or any of the requirements which may be included in a notice under sub-section (2) of section 22 and may proceed to assess or reassess

MAHARAJ KUMAR KAMAL SINGH vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BIHAR & ORISSA

In the result we hold that the Patna High Court was right in coming

depreciation allowance have been computed, he may, at any time within four years of the end of that year serve on the assessee a notice containing all or any of the requirements, which may be included in a notice under sub-s. (2) of s. 22, and may proceed to assess or reassess

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

reassess such income, profits or gains or recompute the loss or depreciation allowance; and the provisions of this Act shall

PLASTIBLENDS INDIA LIMITED THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RANGE 8(2) MUMBAI

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI

reassessment proceedings and passed an assessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 computing the gross total income at Rs.34,15,583/-. Though, the assessee had disclaimed deduction in respect of depreciation

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

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

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD NO.16(2) vs. M/S TECHSPAN INDIA PRIVATE LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S. TECHSPAN INDIA LTD.) THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIR

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL

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

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed

Bench: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V. NAGARATHNA

depreciation on those assets under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for the sake of convenience) though the appellant was not the owner of the assets for the purpose of the said transactions. 2.2. On 09.06.2000 the Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 148 of the Act for the reassessment

MALEGAON ELECTRICITY CO. (P) LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY

In the result we allow this appeal and in place of the

depreciation accrued as well as that allowed. The entire consideration for the sale was paid in cash on October 4, 1951 and the profits earned by the assessee for the period of six months ended on September 30, 1951 were paid over to the Belgaum Company. In completing the original assessment, the Income-tax Officer observed: "On going through these

ASSOCIATED STONE INDUSTRIES (KOTAH) LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJASTHAN

The appeal is disposed of as above and the matter is

reassessments of the appellant-company for the said years could be justified under Section 34(1)(b) of the Act. On question No. 5, the High court held that the penal interest calculated and charged under Section 18A(6) or 18A(8) could only be challenged in an appeal against the order of assessment to tax and the assessee would

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

reassessment proceedings here is based on definite material not considered at the time of the original assessment. In the above view of the matter, we uphold the High Court’s view on the first question. The second question raises a more difficult problem. There can be no doubt that the decision of the Madras High Court in Ramachari squarely covers

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX,SIMLA vs. M/S GREEN WORLD CORPORATION

Appeals are disposed of with the aforementioned directions

depreciation was not causing any prejudice to the interest of Revenue at least in the year under consideration and the apprehension of the learned CIT about such prejudice which may be caused to the Revenue in the subsequent years was based on 29 assumptions and surmises depending on ultimate eventualities like the one happened in the present case when