Commissioner of Income Tax- IT and TP vs. M/s. Louis Berger International Inc.,

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

reassessment: a brief overview ............................ 33 III. The submissions addressed ...................................................... 46 IV. Evaluation of the Court ............................................................ 82 A. Declared values and the power

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s. Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Ltd.

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

reassessment: a brief overview ............................ 33 III. The submissions addressed ...................................................... 46 IV. Evaluation of the Court ............................................................ 82 A. Declared values and the power

COMMR OF INCOME TAX [TDS], HYDERABAD vs. M/S JAYADARSHINI HOUSING PVT LTD., HYDERABAD

Appeals are hereby dismissed by

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassess. The Assessing Officer has no power to review; he has the power to reassess. But reassessment has to be based

Rachit V Shah vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax-7

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassessment action initiated by the respondent pertaining to Assessment Year [‘AY’] 2013-14. We take note of the principal challenge

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. M/s.ZENOTECH LABORATORIES LIMITED

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

reassessments pending on the date of the search shall abate. The total income for such AYs will have to be computed

Sunil Kumar Ahuja vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

reassess the entioned six years in separate f the six years. In other words, ment order in respect of each

M/S.MALLIKARJUNA RICE INDUSTRIES vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

reassess. '[1:e fu: :s;in.g Officer has no power to review, l.e h.-rs tl'e power to reassess

THE COMMISSIONER OCF INCOME TAX-I vs. M/S.BHARAT BIOTECH INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed

Bench: :

reassessment order without considering the fact that the reopening was made on the basis of specific and credible information from

The Commissioner of Income Tax(Central) vs. M/s.Madhu Enterprises

Bench: The Learned

reassessment proceedings were initiated pursuant to a notice dated 30.03.2017 issued under Section 148 of the Act. The AO had reopened

M/s. Dakshin Infrastructures Private Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

reassessment under Section 147 of the Act overlooking the contention of the appellant that the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act is not applicable

M/s Kausalya Agro Farms and Developers pvt. ltd vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

reassessment under Section 147 of the Act overlooking the contention of the appellant that the first proviso to Section 147 of the Act is not applicable

THE COMM. OF INCOME TAX-2, HYDERABAD vs. M/S IJM (INDIA) INFRASTRUCTURE LTD., HYDERABAD

Accordingly, the appeal (ITAT/381/2017) stands dismissed

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

reassessment for the A.Y. 2004-05 is not valid on the ground that “no tangible material which came into possession

M/S NMDC LIMITED vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

The appeal is allowed

Bench: T.VINOD KUMAR,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

reassessment of the amount. 92. Therefore, Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month

Pinna Nageswara RAo, vs. Commissioner of Income tax, IV (A.P)

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

reassessment of market value using a fair and just approach. Learned Counsel clarifies that they are seeking compensation based on actual

PRL COMMR OF INCOME TAX-7, HYDERABAD vs. M/S SRI VENKATESWARA PADMAVATHI COMPAY, KHAMMAM DIST

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassessment of market value using a fair and just approach. Learned Counsel clarifies that they are seeking compensation based on actual

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S. RASA AGROTECH PRIVATE LTD.

Accordingly, the appeals are liable to be dismissed on the

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassessment order by the order dated 16th October 2009. Nevertheless, even if one takes the said order of the ITAT

THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T.-I, HYDERABAD. vs. M/S. AKASH CABLE TV NETWORK PVT.LTD., HYDERABAD.

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassessment proceedings were initiated after information was received from Director of Investigation regarding bogus/accommodation entries allegedly provided by different companies

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax - Central vs. Shri. Isanaka Mastan Reddy

Bench: J SREENIVAS RAO,ALOK ARADHE

reassessment proceedings made by the revenue and observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Deepak