SHARANJEET KAUR, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) before completing the reassessment under Section 147 read with Section 144B renders the assessment invalid and bad in law. This is a mandatory procedural requirement.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed late by 117 days, which was condoned by the tribunal. The core issue was the validity of a reassessment completed under Section 147 read with Section 144B without issuing a notice under Section 143(2).
What were the issues?
Whether a reassessment framed under Section 147 read with Section 144B is valid if a notice under Section 143(2) was not issued to the assessee after filing of the return in response to a notice under Section 148.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 148,Section 142(1)
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 09.12.2025 for the assessment year 2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the very outset, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 117 days. That explaining the said delay, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted condonation petition a/w. affidavit, dated 25.06.2026. The r
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 147
- 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
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026