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

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

reassessed taking into consideration the incriminating material and other material in possession of the Assessing Officer. 1.1 For the sake of convenience, Civil Appeal No. 6580 of 2021 filed by the Revenue be treated and considered as the lead matter. 2. The core issue involved in the present batch of appeals is the scope of assessment under section 153A

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

The appeal is allowed

5 148 of the Act for reassessment for the assessment years 1968-69 to 1971-72 and for the year 1982-83 on the ground that the proposed reassessment for those assessment years had already become barred by time under Section

MODI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, MODINAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, DELHI

The appeals are allowed in the above

5) of Section 139. A best judgment assessment could also be made under Section 144, if the assessee failed to comply with all the terms of a notice under sub-section (2) of Section 143. The assessment under Section 143 or 144 had to be completed within the time limit prescribed by sub- section (1) of Section 153. After completion

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

reassessment under sub-section (3) of section 92CD; (c) an order made under section 154 or section 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections except of an order referred to in sub- section (12) of section 144BA

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, the AO allowed deduction on this account as well in respect of the same in the sum of Rs.2,13,89,379/- while computing the profit

BRIJ LAL vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, JALANDHAR

reassessment or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total income determined under sub-section (1) of section 143 or on the basis of the regular assessment aforesaid. (4) Where, as a result of an order under section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section

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

The appeals are allowed

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

5) Where effect to an order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 is to be given by the Assessing Officer or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be, wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment

SHITAL FIBERS LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the IT Act were initiated in respect of the said Assessment Year by the order dated 10th December 2008 by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Range II, Jalandhar. Reliance was placed by the Revenue on the decision of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘ITAT’), Chennai (Special Bench) in the case of ACIT

COMMR.OF INCOME TAX-I,NEW DELHI vs. VATIKA TOWNSHIP P.LTD

Appeals of the assessees are allowed deleting the surcharge levied by the

5 of 57 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 540 of 2009) Page 6 JUDGMENT provisions of Section 113 of the Act as inserted by the Finance Act, 1995 and clarified by the Board Circular No.717 dated 14.08.1995, surcharge was leviable on the income assessed. According to the CIT the charging provision was Section 4 of the Act which

SHABINA ABRAHAM vs. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS

5) of Section 159. 16. Similarly, under Section 168, where the assessee has left a Will, the income of the estate of the deceased person 20 Page 21 JUDGMENT becomes chargeable in the hands of the executor of such will. This is made clear by Section 168. 17. It will be seen that the definition of “assessee” contained in Section

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

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

reassessment. However, the High Court of Kerala in appeals filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Act has reversed the findings of the Tribunal by deciding the appeals preferred by the revenue in its favour. 2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders passed by the High Court of Kerala (briefly “the High Court” hereinafter), the assessee had preferred special

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

The appeal is allowed without

reassessment proceedings was valid and he had jurisdiction to undertake such an exercise. It is in the aforesaid backdrop of facts that the impugned notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 12th May, 2004 was challenged by the respondent. 5

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 14 vs. JASJIT SINGH

The appeals are dismissed in terms of signed

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

reassessment of any assessment year within the pe- riod of the six assessment years shall abate, is the date of initiation of the search under Section 5

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

Appeals are disposed of with the aforementioned directions

5% of the turnover at Parwanoo, would be entitled for deduction u/s 80IA/IB.” Other directions were issued and diverse proceedings were also directed to be initiated. 25. Indisputably, the Assessee carried the matter in appeal. Before the Appellate Authority, a large number of grounds were raised. We may, however, notice that a question with regard to the propriety

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

reassessment proceedings, the Commissioner of Income Tax purported to invoke his revisional jurisdiction in terms of Section 263 of the Act and by an order dated 29.03.2004 held as under: "5

SASI ENTERPRISES vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Egmore), Chennai, For The Willful & Deliberate Failure To File Returns For The Assessment Years 1991-92, 1992-93 & Hence Committing Offences Punishable Under Section 276 Cc Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short “The Act”). Complaints Were Filed On 21.8.1997 After Getting The Sanction From The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Ii, Chennai Under Section 279(1) Of The Income Tax Act. Appellants Filed Two Discharge Petitions Under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C., Which Were Dismissed By The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vide Order Dated 14.6.2006. Appellants Preferred Crl. R.C. Nos.781 To 786 Of 2006 Before The High Court Of Madras Which Were Dismissed By The High Court Vide Its Common Order Dated 2.12.2006, Which Are The Subject Matters Of These Appeals.

5) was reduced to one year from the end of the relevant assessment year. The provision of Section 139(2) stood incorporated in Section 142(1)(i). The notice under Page 18 JUDGMENT 18 Section 142(1)(i) to furnish a return of income cannot be issued in the course of the assessment year itself and need not give

THE COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MADRAS vs. M/S M.M. RUBBER & CO

5 of 9 tion that may also be set here and that reads: "2. The Collector of Central Excise may, of his own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an adjudi- cating authority subordinate to him has passed any decision or order under this Act for the purpose of satisfying himself

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

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

reassess under Section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessees under Section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before 01.04.2001. Thus, all concluded transactions prior to 01.04.2001 were made final and not allowed to be re­opened. 36. The memorandum of explanation explaining