GEETA JAISWAL,JAUNPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the addition sustained by the CIT(A) was not justified as there was no material to suggest defects in the assessee's accounts, and the provisions of Section 145(3) were not invoked. The Tribunal deleted the addition.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged the validity of an assessment framed without proper compliance with certain sections of the Income Tax Act and the confirmation of additions to her income based on estimated gross profit rates. The Assessing Officer had made additions based on estimated GP rates, and the CIT(A) partially upheld these additions.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment was validly framed and whether additions to income based on estimated gross profit rates are justified when the assessee's books of accounts are not found to be incorrect or incomplete.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 148B,Section 153,Section 132(4),Section 145(1),Section 145(2),Section 145(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.394/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2021-22 against impugned appellate order dated 18.01.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Lucknow [“CIT(A)” for short]. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -
“1. Because the Ld CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the grounds of appeal whereby the appellant had challenged the validity of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer in search case assessment without properly complying, with the provisions of section 148/143(2)/148B and section 153 of the Act. The present assessment in search case withou
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 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026