MADHUBEN NAROTTAMBHAI PATEL,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD-3, NAVSARI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessment framed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act was not sustainable due to the absence of a mandatory notice under section 143(2) of the Act. Relying on various judicial pronouncements, it was stated that this defect cannot be cured under section 292BB of the Act.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a senior citizen, deposited Rs. 2,79,842/- in her bank account. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment under section 147 and made an addition of Rs. 3,38,449/-, determining the total income at Rs. 3,38,320/- against the returned income of Rs. 370/-. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment framed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act is sustainable in the absence of a notice under section 143(2) of the Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 271(1)(c),Section 292BB
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(5)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.
- ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon623 citing321 ITR 362 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon84 citing188 Taxmann 113 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Sukhini P. Modi21 citing367 ITR 682 · 2014 · HC
- PCIT v. Marck Biosciences Ltd.20 citing106 Taxmann.com 399 · 2019 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Panorama Builders Pvt. Ltd.17 citing45 Taxmann.com 159 · 2014 · HC
Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH
PER BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, AM: This appeal by assessee emanates from the order dated 07.08.2024, passed by the Learned Addl./JT-Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-5, Mumbai u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) for assessment year (AY) 2012-13, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (AO for short) u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 03.12.2019. Grounds of appeal raise by the asses
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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026