SHANKAR LAL AGRAWAL, RAIPUR, RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the notice issued under Section 148A(b) was void ab initio as it did not provide the mandatory minimum of seven clear days for the assessee to respond. Consequently, all subsequent proceedings were deemed a nullity.
What were the facts?
The assessee received a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on March 19, 2022, with a compliance date of March 22, 2022. This provided only two clear days for response, falling short of the mandatory seven days.
What were the issues?
Whether the notice issued under Section 148A(b) provided the mandatory minimum seven clear days for compliance, and the validity of subsequent proceedings if this condition was not met.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 01.07.2026 for the assessment year 2018-19 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
The contention in law assailed by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee is that notice u/s.148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’), dated 19.03.2022 does not provide mandato
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 148A(b)
- Venkata Durga Agencies, Kakinada vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, KakinadaITA 692/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S Mittal Alloy Castings Co., Raigarh vs ACIT, Circle-1(1), BilaspurITA 685/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Heard12 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Khubchandani, Raipur vs DCIT, Circle 1(1), RaipurITA 437/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Farman Sk, Malda vs I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), MaldaITA 3001/KOL/2025[2020-2021]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2020-2021
- Pramila Satyanarayan Bhandari, Surat vs DCIT, Circle-1(3), SuratITA 22/SRT/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026