DHAVAL EXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 5(1)(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2532/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 April 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL ( (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid due to the non-issuance of a mandatory notice under Section 143(2) after the Section 148 notice. Consequently, the reassessment order was quashed.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenged the reopening of assessment and subsequent additions. A key issue was the absence of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after the notice for reassessment under Section 148 was issued.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment proceedings are valid without issuing a notice under Section 143(2) after the issuance of a notice under Section 148. Whether the permission for reopening under Section 151(2) was validly obtained.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 151(2)

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, MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Appellant: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 25/04/2024

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2012-13, raising following grounds:

1.

The Ld. AO was not justified in reopening of the case u/s u/s 147 by issuing notice u/s 148 of the IT Act, 1961 and also the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the same.

Dhaval Exim Pvt. Ltd. 2

2.

The Ld. AO ha

2.

The Ld. AO has erred in making addition of Rs. 32,41,640/ s erred in making addition of Rs. 32,41,640/- (11.81% of Rs. (11.81% of Rs.2,74,48,260/-) and also

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 →