INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(2), RAIPUR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT vs. MUKESH KEDIA , H.NO. SIXTY FOUR

ITA 400/RPR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 March 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)11 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the notice u/s 148 was issued by an officer without valid jurisdiction, and the subsequent assessment was framed by another officer without proper transfer orders and without issuing a fresh notice u/s 148. Therefore, the reassessment proceedings were void ab initio.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of a portion of the addition made for bogus purchases. The assessee, through a cross-objection, challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings due to a lack of proper jurisdiction in issuing the notice and framing the assessment.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the reassessment proceedings were valid when the notice u/s 148 was issued by an officer lacking jurisdiction, and the assessment was completed by another officer without proper jurisdiction or transfer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 127

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.03.2025Pronounced: 19.03.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.400/RPR/2024
CO No.15/RPR/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM This appeal preferred by the Revenue emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 05.07.2024 for the assessment year 2012-13 as per the following grounds of appeal on record:

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs.6,98,345/- out of the total addition of Rs.7,75,938/- made by the A.O on account of bogu

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.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →