ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LIMITED

The appeals are allowed

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

assessment or reassessment shall be completed in accordance with the provisions of this section as it stood immediately before its substitution by the Finance Act, 2016 (28 of 2016). Explanation 1.—For the purposes of this section, in computing the period of limitation— (i) the time taken in reopening

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

reopening or reconsidering the whole assessment or permitting the assessee to reagitate questions which had been decided in the original assessment proceedings. It is only the under- assessment which is set aside and not the entire assessment when reassessment

K.M. SHARMA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(7),NEW DELHI

The appeal is allowed

reopening assessments, which have attained finality on expiry of prescribed period of limitation. Sub-section (2) in putting such embargo refers to whole of sub-section (1) meaning thereby to insulate all assessments, which have become final and may have been found liable to reassessments

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

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

The appeal is allowed without

reopened the assessment by issuing a notice in terms of Section 148 of the Act on the ground that it has reason to believe that the income assessable to tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act. The respondent asked for the reason for re-opening the assessment. On 31.5.2004 a return of income declaring

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

reopen assessment and there was no establishment of any nexus or link connecting the source of the investment to the assessee; the reassessment

NEW DELHI TELEVISION LTD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

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

reassessments were not satisfied. The re­assessments were made with reference to clause (b) of Section 147 of the Act, and apparently the Income Tax Officer proceeded on the basis that in consequence of information in his   possession   he   had   reason   to   believe   that   income chargeable   to   tax   had   escaped   assessment   for   the   two assessment years. From the material before

SHABINA ABRAHAM vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

reopened. It puts a premium on one's credulity to accept that having created a special jurisdiction to assess or reassess

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

Appeals are disposed of with the aforementioned directions

assessment, reassessment or recomputation may be taken.” The aforementioned provision although appears to be of a very wide amplitude, but would not mean that recourse to reopening

PRINCIPAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (INVESTIGATION) vs. LALJIBHAI KANJIBHAI MANDALIA

The appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA

reassessment of Income under the Act or its predecessor statute, the Essential Commodities Act, 1955; the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 as well as in respect of action of the Revenue in the matter of 9 (2000) 242 ITR 302 (Del.) 10 (2003) 260 ITR 80 (SC) 11 (2005) 278 ITR 36 (Bom.) 12 (2021) 433 ITR 203 (Telangana

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS vs. M/S CANON INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA

reopen assessment or recover duties which have escaped assessment has been conferred on an officer other than the officer of the rank of the officer who initially took the decision to assess the goods. 14. Where the statute confers the same power to perform an act on different officers, as in this case, the two officers, especially when they belong

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5 MUMBAI vs. M/S. ESSAR TELEHOLDINGS LTD. THROUGH ITS MANAGER

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

reopening the assessments, the Central Board of Direct Taxes came with a clarification vide Circular No. 11 of 2001 dated 23.07.2001.  Para 4 of the Circular stated as follows:­ “The Board have considered this matter and hereby directs that the assessments where the proceedings have become final before the first day of April, 2001 should not be re­opened under section

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

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

reopening of the assessments; and 7. Interest By the impugned common judgment and order, the High Court has summarised the conclusion in paragraph 91 as under: (i) The Assessees, incorporated under the company law of Sikkim, are resident Indian companies. If any income accrued to them or was earned by them in India prior to 1st April 1990, then such

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed

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

reopened. The Assessing Officer then passed an Assessment Order dated 30.03.2000 for the Assessment Year 1997- 1998. The main issue pertained to the income in respect of the activity of leasing. As per the Assessment Order, the appellant had been accounting for lease rental received, by treating the same as a financial transaction. As a result, the lease rental

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

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

COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX vs. HINDUSTAN BULK CARRIERS

The appeals are disposed of accordingly

reassessment for any years and at any stage in original, appellate or revisional proceeding. The definition of ’case’ excludes appeals or revisions which have not been formally admitted by the concerned authorities. This definition clause (b) of Section 245 A indicates that the Settlement Commission can take up for settlement a ’case’ as defined which is pending at any stage

EMPIRE STORES vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

reassessment given to the petitioner is invalid because it is based on the application of the larger period of limitation prescribed under the new law. The High Court has dismissed the petitioner’s writ petition on the ground that the points raised by the petitioner are available to him for being raised by the petitioner before the assessing authority

MANISH MAHESHWARI vs. ASSTT.COMMNR.OF INCOME TAX

The appeals are allowed

reassessment" in section 132B shall be construed as references to "block assessment". "158BD. Undisclosed income of any other person \026 Where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that any undisclosed income belongs to any person, other than the person with respect to whom search was made under section 132 or whose books of account or other documents or any assets were