INTEGRATED SERVICE POINT LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the notice under Section 148 was invalid due to improper approval, making the subsequent assessment order void. Consequently, the assessee's appeals were allowed, and the Revenue's appeals were dismissed.
What were the facts?
A search action was conducted on the assessee company, leading to the seizure of a hard disk containing unrecorded financial transactions. The employee's statement confirmed some transactions were outside books, but the director clarified they included loans and business expenditures.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 due to alleged procedural infirmities in obtaining approval. The Tribunal also considered the merits of additions made based on seized material.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(12)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT1,484 citing288 ITR 1 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
- Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal713 citing167 Taxmann.com 70 · 2024 · SC · Read judgment
- Mehta Parikh & Co. v. CIT396 citing30 ITR 181 · 1956 · SC
- CIT v. Indeo Airways Pvt. Ltd.114 citing26 Taxmann.com 244 · 2012 · HC · Read judgment
- 110 (Bom) PCIT v. Hitesh Mody (HUF)98 citing172 Taxmann.com 283 · 2025 · HC
- Ghanshyam K. Khabrani v. ACIT89 citing346 ITR 443 · 2012 · HC
- Navjivan Oil Mills v. CIT75 citing124 Taxmann 392 · 2002 · HC · Read judgment
- Thiru. A. J. Ramesh Kumar v. Dy. CIT29 citing139 Taxmann.com 190 · 2022 · HC
- Hyderabad v. Purushottam Jhadhav19 citing40 Taxmann.com 533 · 2013 · HC
- CIT v. South India Corporation Agencies Ltd.14 citing164 Taxmann 249 · 2007 · HC
- FIVES India Engineering & Projects (P) Ltd. v. ITO5 citing464 ITR 760 · HC
- Logamaheshwara v. Income-tax Officer4 citing167 Taxmann.com 320 · 2024 · HC
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद एवं माननीय "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम' BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1881, 1882 & 1883/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23
Integrated Service Point Ltd., The Dy./Asst. Commissioner of (Formerly Integrated Service Point Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd.,) Central Circle-2(4), 6C, 6th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Chennai. Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai – 600 002. PAN: AAACI 9527P
(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1874, 1876 & 1879/Chny/2025 िनधा;रण वष; /Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2019-20 & 2022-23
The Dy./Asst. Commissioner of Integrated Service Point Ltd., Income Tax, (Formerly Integrated Service Point Central Circle-2(4), Vs. Pvt. Ltd.,) 6C, 6th Floor, Gaiety Palace I/L, Chennai. Blackers Road, Anna Road H.O., Chennai – 600 002. PAN: AAACI 9527P
(अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)
अपीलाथJ की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr. Y. Sridhar, FCA LMथJ की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr. Bipin C.N, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of He
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 →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026