Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
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
  • 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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
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
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 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
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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 :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        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

        <h1>Tribunal Invalidates Assessment Reopening, Affirms Interest Taxability</h1> <h3>M/s. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engg.) Pvt. Ltd Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11 (1), Kolkata</h3> M/s. G.S. Atwal & Co. (Engg.) Pvt. Ltd Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11 (1), Kolkata - TMI Issues Involved:1. Jurisdictional issue regarding the reopening of assessments under section 148 of the Income Tax Act.2. Year of taxability of interest income received due to a High Court order.Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdictional Issue Regarding Reopening of Assessments:The primary issue in both appeals is the jurisdictional validity of reopening the assessments for the assessment years (A.Ys.) 2007-08 and 2008-09. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notices under section 148 of the Income Tax Act on 09.10.2013, which were beyond four years from the end of the relevant assessment years. The Tribunal noted that the reasons for reopening were identical to those recorded for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07, where the Tribunal had already quashed the reopening.The reasons for reopening were based on the High Court’s order dated 17.04.2008, which directed HSCL to pay interest to the assessee for the period 28.11.1998 to 31.03.2008. The AO believed that the interest income of Rs. 10,58,25,030/- should be divided equally over ten assessment years from A.Y. 1998-99 to 2008-09, and since this income was not offered for tax in the respective years, it had escaped assessment.The Tribunal, referring to its earlier decision, held that the reopening of assessments based on the CIT(A)’s findings for A.Y. 2009-10 was not legally valid. The CIT(A) had no jurisdiction to direct the AO to bring the amount to tax in an assessment year not involved in the appeal before him. The Tribunal emphasized that the CIT(A) could only decide matters relating to the assessment year before him and not otherwise.2. Year of Taxability of Interest Income:The dispute also involved the year of taxability of the interest income received due to the High Court order. The AO taxed the amount in the year of receipt, while the CIT(A) held that it should be taxed on an accrual basis, as the assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had applied the Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Rama Bai v. CIT, which stated that interest on enhanced compensation for land compulsorily acquired should be taken to have accrued year after year from the date of delivery of the land till the date of the court order.The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had correctly decided that the interest income should be assessed in the respective years in which it accrued, rather than in one lump sum in the year of receipt. The Tribunal reiterated that the CIT(A) had no power to give directions to the AO to reopen assessments for years not before him.Conclusion:The Tribunal quashed the reopening of assessments for A.Ys. 2007-08 and 2008-09, following its earlier decision for A.Ys. 2005-06 and 2006-07. The Tribunal held that the reopening was bad in law and did not deem it necessary to adjudicate other issues on merit. Consequently, both appeals of the assessee were allowed.Order Pronounced:The order was pronounced in the open Court on March 22nd, 2022.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found