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

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

153A of the IT Act (as then prevailing was) the reassessment should have been completed within two years and in the instant case the assessment year 1988-89 to 1992-93 continuously and notice under Section 148 was issued on 30-3-1995 so the proceedings of assessment further would be barred after March, 1997. Therefore, as on today

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

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

153A of the IT Act (as then prevailing was) the reassessment should have been completed within two years and in the instant case the assessment year 1988-89 to 1992-93 continuously and notice under Section 148 was issued on 30-3-1995 so the proceedings of assessment further would be barred after March, 1997. Therefore, as on today

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

153A of the IT Act (as then prevailing was) the reassessment should have been completed within two years and in the instant case the assessment year 1988-89 to 1992-93 continuously and notice under Section 148 was issued on 30-3-1995 so the proceedings of assessment further would be barred after March, 1997. Therefore, as on today

The Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. M/s. Jyothi Wines,

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

1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the document recovered on search can be presumed to be true and correct under Section 292C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short)? (2) Has not the Tribunal committed an error insofar as putting the burden of proof on the Department? (3) Whether the first