SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

K.G BANSAL, N.V.VASUDEVAN
C. P. Kukreja & Associates (P. ) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Mrs. Jyoti Lehga, Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Cir. 3(1), New Delhi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Ashwani Taneja, Ankur Aggarwal, Rakesh Gupta,Smt. Pramila Sharma

ORDER

NV Vasudevan, Judicial Member. - These are appeals by the assessee against a common Order dated 29-1-2004 of Commissioner of Income-tax(A)-VI, New Delhi relating to the assessment years 1994-95 and 1995-96.

2. The first ground of challenge in these two appeals is to the validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings by invoking the provisions of section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The facts, which are necessary for adjudication of the aforesaid ground of appeal of the assessee are as follows. The assessee is a Private Limited Company carrying on business of rendering consultancy in the field of architecture. They are also engaged in the business of rendering consultancy services in the field of engineering and planning etc. For the assessment year 1994-95, the assessee filed a return of income declaring income of Rs. 17,41,030 on 30-11-1994. By letter dated 8-9-1995 the Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to file certain details. The assessee had in the computation of income claimed depreciation of Rs. 54,42,165. A depreciation chart had been enclosed along with the computation of income. Under the head plant and machinery costing less than Rs. 5,000 the assessee had

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top