ITO-13(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SETHIA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2739/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2024AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)27 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had indeed issued and served the notice under Section 143(2), contrary to the CIT(A)'s finding. Furthermore, the Tribunal found that the assessee failed to discharge its onus under Section 68 regarding the genuineness of share premium transactions, restoring the Assessing Officer's addition.

What were the facts?

The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order quashing the assessment order for lack of proper notice and for deleting additions made under Section 68. The CIT(A) had quashed the assessment order due to non-issuance of a valid notice under Section 143(2) and deleted the addition on share premium, deeming it capital in nature.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order was bad in law for want of a valid notice under Section 143(2), and whether the addition on account of share premium under Section 68 was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 143(2),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(17)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, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HONBLEDr. Kishor Dhule

For Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule
Pronounced: 10.05.2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (AM)

1.

This appeal by the revenue is preferred against order dated 08.06.2023 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to A.Y. 2010-11. Sethia Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

2.

The grievance of the revenue read as under: -

“1. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) has erred in quashing the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 27.12.2016 stating that assessment order has been passed without issue of notice u/a 143(2) of Act which is factually incorrect as notice u/ s 143(2) of the

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →