Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2000 (11) TMI 96 - HC - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Court rules against Agro Industries on loss carry forward post reassessment. The High Court ruled against the assessee, an Agro Industries Corporation, in a case concerning the carry forward of losses determined from a return filed ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Court rules against Agro Industries on loss carry forward post reassessment.

                          The High Court ruled against the assessee, an Agro Industries Corporation, in a case concerning the carry forward of losses determined from a return filed in response to a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The Court held that the assessee could not benefit from reassessment proceedings to claim losses not permissible originally. The judgment emphasized the Revenue's interests in reassessment proceedings and upheld the Income-tax Officer's decision to disallow the carry forward of the loss, overturning decisions by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal.




                          Issues involved:
                          Interpretation of provisions under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding the carry forward of losses determined based on a return filed in response to a notice under section 148.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Issue of Carry Forward of Loss:
                          The case involved a controversy over whether an assessee is entitled to the benefit of carrying forward a loss determined based on a return filed in response to a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The assessee, an Agro Industries Corporation, filed its return after receiving a notice under section 148, declaring a loss. The Income-tax Officer initially disallowed the carry forward of the loss, stating that the return was not filed voluntarily. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the carry forward. The High Court analyzed the scope and ambit of section 147 of the Act, which empowers the Income-tax Officer to assess income that has escaped assessment. The Court emphasized that proceedings under section 147 are for the benefit of the Revenue, and an assessee cannot take advantage of reassessment proceedings to claim benefits that were not permissible in the absence of such proceedings.

                          2. Interpretation of Section 147:
                          The High Court scrutinized the interpretation of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that the Income-tax Officer, in reassessment proceedings initiated under this section, has the authority to drop the proceedings if no income has escaped assessment. The Court clarified that the Income-tax Officer cannot determine a loss in reassessment proceedings, as this would allow the assessee to claim set off of the loss in subsequent years to the detriment of the Revenue. The judgment referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd., which established the principles governing reassessment proceedings and the limitations on the assessee's claims during such proceedings.

                          3. Precedent and Legal Position:
                          The High Court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Sun Engineering Works P. Ltd. to establish the legal position regarding reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act. The Court highlighted that reassessment proceedings do not wipe out the original assessment and that the assessee cannot seek a review or revision of the concluded assessment during reassessment. The judgment emphasized that the object, scope, and ambit of section 147 are to benefit the Revenue, and allowing an assessee to claim additional benefits in reassessment would be against the purpose of such proceedings.

                          Conclusion:
                          The High Court answered the question referred to it in the negative, favoring the Revenue and denying the assessee the benefit of carrying forward the loss determined based on the return filed in response to the notice under section 148. The Court affirmed that the Income-tax Officer was justified in refusing to allow the carry forward of the loss, as it would have been to the detriment of the Revenue. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal were deemed to be unjustified in reversing the Income-tax Officer's decision.

                          This analysis highlights the detailed examination of the legal provisions, precedents, and the objective of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act in the context of the carry forward of losses determined based on returns filed in response to notices under section 148.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found