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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

section (9) shall be exercisable by such Assessing Officer. 16. In the instant case certainly the Investigating Officer, who seized the goods on which the reassessment

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

section (9) shall be exercisable by such Assessing Officer. 16. In the instant case certainly the Investigating Officer, who seized the goods on which the reassessment

The Commissioner of Income Tax [Central] vs. Smt P Sujana

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: CHALLA KODANDA RAM,G.CHANDRAIAH

reassessment under Section 147, not a case for rectification wherein the tax liability has been enhanced. 6. Learned counsel for the revenue justifying the orders of the authorities submitted that Section 80 of the Act provides for submission of return for losses. In terms of the said Section, it is mandatory that the return for losses has to be filed

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Akula Nageswara Rao

In the result, the orders passed by the Assessing

Bench: SANJAY KUMAR,GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD

9. As we have already noticed, the query posed by the appellant company would give a feeling, that it was asking the Advance Ruling Authority to clarify, whether a particular transaction of it can be included in the taxable turnover under the KST Act? The Advance Ruling Authority relying on the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court

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

9. The validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act by the Assessing Officer was challenged

The Commissioner of Income Tax - III, vs. M/s. Suven Pharmaceuticals Limited,

Appeals are dismissed

reassessment  or recomputation exceeds the tax on the total  income determined [under sub­section (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

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Kaveri Bar AND Restaurant,

Bench: ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI,V RAMASUBRAMANIAN

9, 2004 which was issued in the original assessment proceedings under section 143 makes it clear that the point on which the reassessment

PROGREESIVE CONSTRUCTIONS LIMITED vs. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

reassessment proceedings, assessing officer noted that in the original assessment proceedings, he had not talcn into account certain items of receips, which should not have been treated as contract income being in the nature of other income not relatable to the contract income. Therefore, those receips were added to the incorne of the assessee. Assessing officer funher found that assessee

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

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

9. We also bear in consideration the submission of the respondents who contend that the scheme of sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 17 clearly suggests that a reassessment

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

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

9. We also bear in consideration the submission of the respondents who contend that the scheme of sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 17 clearly suggests that a reassessment

The Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-4 vs. Sri. Krishna Chigullapally

Bench: N.TUKARAMJI,UJJAL BHUYAN

9 STRP NO. 08 OF 2022 AND CONNECTED MATTERS 45 jurisdiction under Section 29 of the Act because in the case on hand as far as Nokia was concerned, the phone charger was sold as a separate accessory and, therefore, Apex Court held that it is not part of mobile phone. The battery was supplied with mobile phone and, therefore

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

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

9. As per Section 147, the AO may, subject to the provisions of Sections 148 to 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

Mr. Vasamsetty Veera Venkata Satyanarayana vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1

The appeal is allowed and the order passed

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

reassessed in terms of Section 154 of the Act and upon the amount being crystalized the same was immediately refunded to the respondent and the question of payment of interests does not and cannot arise. 9

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

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

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

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

Kuchipudi Krishna Kishore vs. THE DCIT, CIR-2[1],

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,N.TUKARAMJI

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

Commissioner of Income Tax -II, vs. M/S Kasila Farms Ltd.,

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires

THE PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. L. SURYAKANTHAM, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,KONGARA VIJAYA LAKSHMI

Section 23(1)(A) of the LA Act from the date of award till the date of possession as there is a gap of 3 years from the date of award to possession of the acquired land. 18.6 Learned Senior Counsel/Learned Counsel for the Appellants submit that the acquired land’s potential, urban character, and intended acquisition purpose requires