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

153, assess or reassess such income. 10. In the instant case, the Tribunal, while accepting the plea of the assessee that merely on change of opinion, the concluded assessment was being reopened, noticed that the Assessing Officer had already gone into specific issues arising under Section 10A of the Act. It can be noticed that from the reasons recorded

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

3 SCC 76 57 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters the proceedings before the Deputy Superintendent or the Assistant Collector were vitiated. This position obtains in all the appeals although the type and quality of paper are different. The Central Government merely affirmed the order made by the Collector in each case and did not give any independent reasons

C. SANYASI RAJU vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIZAG.

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

3 SCC 76 57 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters the proceedings before the Deputy Superintendent or the Assistant Collector were vitiated. This position obtains in all the appeals although the type and quality of paper are different. The Central Government merely affirmed the order made by the Collector in each case and did not give any independent reasons

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

3 SCC 76 57 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters the proceedings before the Deputy Superintendent or the Assistant Collector were vitiated. This position obtains in all the appeals although the type and quality of paper are different. The Central Government merely affirmed the order made by the Collector in each case and did not give any independent reasons

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited,(Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,

3 SCC 76 57 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters the proceedings before the Deputy Superintendent or the Assistant Collector were vitiated. This position obtains in all the appeals although the type and quality of paper are different. The Central Government merely affirmed the order made by the Collector in each case and did not give any independent reasons

The Commissioner of Income Tax -V, vs. M/S Secunderabad Club

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

153 referred to as the relevant assessment year): Provided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 148 or this section has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any income chargeable

Sunil Kumar Ahuja vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

3. incorrect in assessee, wh the assessee. Section 153A search. The i that proceedi found during 4. has relied on Meeta Gutgu challenge bef 5. that additions additions had Private Limi which had m purchase of l ultimate bene o. 97 of 2023 er Section 153A (1)(b) of the 4,292/-. Aggrieved against the re the Commissioner of Incom

Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. S.P.Office Needs Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

3. The next undisputed fact as noted by the AO in the Office Note of the assessment order dated 29"^ December, 2008 is as under: "1.There is no incriminating document pertaining to the assessee for this assessment year in the seized record found from the residence of the assessee." 4. The third important fact, which is again not in dispute

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

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 153- C of the Act as if the reassessment is challenged based on HCJ & NTRJ I.T.T.A.Nos.259 of 2022 & batch 4 the material recovered at the time of search of a group concern? 3

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

The appeals are allowed

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 153- C of the Act as if the reassessment is challenged based on HCJ & NTRJ I.T.T.A.Nos.259 of 2022 & batch 4 the material recovered at the time of search of a group concern? 3

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

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 153 A (1) will have to be mandatorily issued to the person searched requiring him to file returns for six AYs immediately preceding the previous year relevant to the AY in which the search takes place. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003544 ITA No.311/2022 Page 3 of 4 ii. Assessments and reassessments

Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. M/s.Kumar Raja Associates

The appeals stand dismissed

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

3 of 4) [ITA-160/2008] substituted by the Finance Act, 2001. In this proviso it has been made clear that where the order u/s 250 or section 254 is received by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner or, as the case may be, the order u/s 263 or section 264 is passed by the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III, vs. Sri. Sudheer Reddy

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

3 of the assessment was already in existence on account of incriminating material collected as a result of search? 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in quashing the assessment even though the assessment has been framed after issue of a valid notice

Commissioner of Income Tax, Guntur vs. Agricultural Market Committee, Krosur

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

3. I.T.A.No.148/2011 was admitted by a bench of this court vide order dated 29.08.2011 on the following substantial question of law: (i) What is the reasonable time within which the proceedings have to be initiated under Section 201(1) of the Income Tax Act, as during the relevant period, the statute did not prescribe any period of limitation

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/S Sri Krishna Drugs Ltd.,

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

153, assess or re-assess any income chargeable to tax which he has reason to believe, has escaped assessment and any other income chargeable to tax which has escaped assessment and which has come to his notice subsequently. The proviso to Section 147 lays down that where an assessment u/s 143(3) has been made, no action shall be taken

Dr.D. Siva Sankara Rao-HUF vs. I.T.O. Ward-2, Eluru

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

reassessment of market value using a fair and just approach. Learned Counsel clarifies that they are seeking compensation based on actual usage and future potentiality of the acquired land. It is submitted that if the land is capable of being used for building purposes in the near future, its valuation must reflect such capability. Reliance is placed on Clause

P.V.S.Raju vs. The Addl. C.I.T.

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,RAMESH RANGANATHAN

reassessment of market value using a fair and just approach. Learned Counsel clarifies that they are seeking compensation based on actual usage and future potentiality of the acquired land. It is submitted that if the land is capable of being used for building purposes in the near future, its valuation must reflect such capability. Reliance is placed on Clause

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

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

3 (2004) 10 SCC 627 4 2009 (8) SCC 582 Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Date:05.10.2025 11:29:12 Signature Not Verified LA.APP. 59/2007 & connected Page 88 of 171 18.4 Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the market value for the acquired land of village, Kilokari cannot be treated differently from the adjacent land of posh colonies such