M/S. ASNP & CO,KAGGADASAPURA MAIN ROAD C V RAMAN NAGAR, BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2)(3),BANGALORE, BANGALORE, KARNATAKA

ITA 680/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 September 2026AY 2020-216 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the intimation under section 143(1) issued after the initiation of scrutiny proceedings under section 143(2) is bad in law. Consequently, any adjustments made via the 143(1) intimation are not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return was selected for scrutiny. A notice under section 143(2) was issued, and later, an intimation under section 143(1) was issued. The assessee argued that the 143(1) intimation, issued after the 143(2) notice, was invalid.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether an intimation under section 143(1) is valid if issued after a notice under section 143(2) initiating scrutiny proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(2),Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Respondent: Shri. Balusamy. H, JCIT

PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 19.12.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →