11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT (242 ITR 381)

Q: What is 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act cannot be initiated unless the assessment proceedings based on a previously filed return have been terminated. Notice for reassessment cannot be issued while original assessment proceedings are pending.

Q: How many judgments cite 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT?

32 judgments on BharatTax cite 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT (242 ITR 381), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(2), Section 142(1), Section 237.

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is allowed

ITA 1670/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Exemption Ward 4, Street, Adambakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. Since, The Issues Raised In These Appeals Are Similar Based On The Same Identical Facts, With The Consent Of Both The Parties, We Proceed To 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…e of the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act by 31.12.2019. In this regard we may refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.N. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 381 (SC) placed at page 87 of the paper book, which held unless the return of income already filed is disposed off, the notice for reassessment under section 148 of the Act cannot be issued i.e., no reassessment proceedings can 49 I.T.A. Nos.1667 to 1670/Chny/24 be initiated so long as the assessment proceedings pending on the basis of return of in…

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

ITA 1667/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.1667, 1668, 1669 & 1670/Chny/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 D.A.V. Educational Trust, 5, S V Illam, Mohanapuri Lake View Street, Adambakkam, Chennai 600 088. [Pan: Aaatc5967A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward 4, Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Shri G. Baskar, Advocate & Shri A. Satyaseelan, Advocate Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit 28.10.2025 21.01.2026 : प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : आदेश/Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: These Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Orders All Dated 05.04.2024 Passed By The Id. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi For The

Section 11Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…e of the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act by 31.12.2019. In this regard we may refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.N. the Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 381 (SC) placed at page 87 of the paper book, which held unless the return of income already filed is disposed off, the notice for reassessment under section 148 of the Act cannot be issued i.e., no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as the assessment proceedings pending on the basis of return of income filed or not terminated. 58. Fur…

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. Aci 10(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6144/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal/Shri Fenil Bhatt, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R

Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ding. In such a situation, revenue could not have issued a notice for reopening under section 147 of the Act. The Hon'ble Court relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of HEH The Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust Vs. CIT (242 ITR 381), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, a notice for reassessment under section 148 cannot be issued. No reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated. 9. Similar is the view taken by th…

Adonis Marketing (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1769/KOL/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Feb 2025AY 2009-2010

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…Vs. K. M. Pachayappan reported in (2008) 304 ITR 264 (Mad); 2007 (7) TMI 229 (Mad), wherein the Hon’ble Madras High Court has further relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of H.H.E The Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust Vs. CIT (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC) which has been further followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Vs. Asstt. Director of Income Tax (2017) 292 ITR 49 (Del.). 4. The Ld. DR, however, has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Allahabad High court in the case of “CIT Vs. Jora Singh reported in (2013) 32 taxmann.com 263”. 5. We have co…

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(4), Mohali

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 334/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 282 & 334/CHD/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Satnam Singh, Vs. ITO, बनाम # 3079, Ward 9, Ward 6(4), Kharar, Mohali District Mohali, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: CDRPS2003M अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( HYBRID MODE ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of He…

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Mohali

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are allowed

ITA 282/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 282 & 334/CHD/2023 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Satnam Singh, Vs. ITO, बनाम # 3079, Ward 9, Ward 6(4), Kharar, Mohali District Mohali, Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: CDRPS2003M अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( HYBRID MODE ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA and Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of He…

Sarojin Satpathy, Bhubaneswar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Bhubaneswarw, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 261/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2017-18 Sarojini Sarojini Satpathy, Satpathy, At:N At:N- Vs. Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner Of Of 3/455, Irc Village, Po/Ps: 3/455, Irc Village, Po/Ps: Income Income Tax, Tax, Circle Circle-5(1), Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. No.Asgps 9377 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 13/8 8/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/8 /8/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr

Section 124(3)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…AR placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of K.M.Pachayappan (2008) 304 ITR 264 (Mad), wherein, following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizama’s Supplemental Family Trust vs CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC) and also the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of KLM Royal Dutch Airlines vs Asst. Director of Income Tax, 292 ITR 49 (Del) held that no action could be initiated u/s.147 of the Act when there is pendency of the return before P a g e 2 | 4 Assessment Year : 2017-18 the Assessing Officer. Ld AR also relied upon the decision…

DCIT, Gurugram vs. Rajesh Kumar, Sonepat

In the result, cross-appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 82/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Rajesh Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Central Circle-2, Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Gurgaon. Delhi Road Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon. C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Delhi Road,Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Umesh Takkar, Ca & Shri Saurabh Nagpal, Ca Respondent By Shri P N Barnwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-3, Gurgaon Dated 31.10.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Both Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 41(1)Section 43BSection 68

…e qua Ground No.1 reiterated the written submissions. For the sake of clarity, the relevant contents of the written submissions are reproduced as under:- “Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H The 1. Nizam's Supplemental family Trust vs CIT, 242 ITR 381 Held that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of notice for reassessments under Section 148 cannot be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated. CIT vs. Ved and Co. 302 ITR 328 2. Delhi High Court where the lord…

Rajesh Kumar, Sonepat vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

In the result, cross-appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 61/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Rajesh Kumar, Vs Acit, C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Central Circle-2, Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Gurgaon. Delhi Road Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2018-19] Dcit, Vs Rajesh Kumar, Gurgaon. C/O-Shiva Constructions Co., Plot No.69, Sidharth Enclave, Delhi Road,Sonipat, Haryana-131001. Pan-Bkspk2518K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Umesh Takkar, Ca & Shri Saurabh Nagpal, Ca Respondent By Shri P N Barnwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : These Two Cross-Appeals Filed By The Assessee & The Revenue, Are Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [“Ld.Cit(A)”]-3, Gurgaon Dated 31.10.2022 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. Both Appeals Of The Assessee & The Revenue Are Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By Way Of Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 41(1)Section 43BSection 68

…e qua Ground No.1 reiterated the written submissions. For the sake of clarity, the relevant contents of the written submissions are reproduced as under:- “Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H The 1. Nizam's Supplemental family Trust vs CIT, 242 ITR 381 Held that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of notice for reassessments under Section 148 cannot be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated. CIT vs. Ved and Co. 302 ITR 328 2. Delhi High Court where the lord…

ITO, WD.9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 35/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata……………….......................…...……………....Appellant Vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…..…..... Respondent 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] C.O. No.6/Kol/2023 (A/O I.T.A. No.35/Kol/2021) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd……............…..........................…....... Cross-Objector 69, Jamunalal Bajaj Street, Kolkata- 700007. [Pan: Aafcm6496E] Vs Ito, Ward-9(1), Kolkata …………..….......................…...……………....Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Department. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 07, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 15, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: This Appeal By The Revenue & Corresponding Cross-Objection By The Assessee Have Been Preferred Against The Order Dated 08.09.2020 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 263

…nt proceedings. He, in this respect, has made the following written submissions along with case laws: “2. The assessee relies on the following decisions in support of its contentions: a) In Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizam’s Supplemet Family Trust vs. CIT [2000] 242 ITR 381 (SC) wherein the Supreme court held as under: (page 387 of 242 ITR): “It is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessments under section 148 could not be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings could be initiated so long as the assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2400/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuthe Dy. Commissioner Of Vs Shri C. Gangadhara Murthy Income-Tax, No. 322, 3Rd A Corss, 2Nd Block Circle - 6(2)(1) 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwaranagar Bangalore . Bangalore 560079. Pan – Agipg 2668 N (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT-DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2

…er section 139(4) was pending, such notice was invalid as no action could have been initiated under section 147 in view of pendency of return before AO. In the case of Trustees of H. E.H. the Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust (2000) 109 Taxman 193 (SC)/(2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC)/(2000) 159 CTR 114 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No 5395 of 1993 dated February 16, 2000 held that where a return filed along with refund application being a valid return, and no assessment order had been communicated to assessee, no action under section 147/148 could have been taken. The decisions brought out here…

The ITO, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for ITA

ITA 2953/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hearing Of An Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 271

…ating proceedings under section 148 of the Act where time-limit for issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not expired. In the case of the case of Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT[2000] 109 Taxman 193 (SC)/[2000] 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court held that it is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessments under section 148 could not be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings could be initiated so long as the assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated. While pas…

Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for ITA

ITA 2626/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hearing Of An Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.J. Vyas, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 2(14)Section 234ASection 271

…ating proceedings under section 148 of the Act where time-limit for issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act has not expired. In the case of the case of Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT[2000] 109 Taxman 193 (SC)/[2000] 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court held that it is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessments under section 148 could not be issued, i.e., no reassessment proceedings could be initiated so long as the assessment proceedings pending on the basis of the return already filed are not terminated. While pas…

M/S. Discoverture Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 126/CTK/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Ch. Satyajit MishraFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Addl

Section 10Section 10A

…hat no assessment order having been passed originally on the return filed by the assessee, the reassessment is not permissible in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust vs CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC). 4. In respect of first issue, it was the submission of ld A.R. that the Assessing Officer had denied the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s.10A of the Act on the ground that the assessee was not functioning from Special Economic Zone as prescribed and required under section 10 of the Act. It was fairly agreed by ld AR that the issue had…

M/S. Discoverture Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 125/CTK/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri Ch. Satyajit MishraFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Addl

Section 10Section 10A

…hat no assessment order having been passed originally on the return filed by the assessee, the reassessment is not permissible in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust vs CIT, 242 ITR 381 (SC). 4. In respect of first issue, it was the submission of ld A.R. that the Assessing Officer had denied the assessee the benefit of deduction u/s.10A of the Act on the ground that the assessee was not functioning from Special Economic Zone as prescribed and required under section 10 of the Act. It was fairly agreed by ld AR that the issue had…

Shri G Venkatesh vs. The Income Tax Officer

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA/29/2018HC Karnataka13 Dec 2021

Bench: S.SUJATHA,S VISHWAJITH SHETTY

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 260Section 260A

…ble Apex Court considering the contention of the assessee that when there was no assessment order even passed in the original proceedings, held that the ratio laid down in Trustees of H.E.H., The Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust’s case [(2000) 242 ITR 381] would be applicable. It has been held that where there is no assessment order passed, there cannot be a notice for re-assessment inasmuch as - 9 - the question of re-assessment arises only when there is an assessment in the first instance. 10. There is no cavil on the legal proposition canvassed by the learned counsel fo…

M/S. Emta Coal Ltd., ( Erstwhile Known As M/S. Eastern Mineral & Trading Agency ), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(1), Kolakta

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2422/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Emta Coal Ltd…………………………………………..............................…….............Appellant 5B, Nandlal Basu Sarani Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aacce 3506 G]

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/s. Emta Coal Ltd…………………………………………..............................…….............Appellant 5B, Nandlal Basu Sarani Kolkata – 700 071 [PAN : AACCE 3506 G] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(1), Kolkata..................….....…......Respondent Appearances by: Shri S.M. Surana, Adv., appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Vijay Shankar/Shri Manish Kanojia, CIT, D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue. D…

Kamlesh Shantilal Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 3335/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Feb 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: 10.02.2021

Section 147

…n'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Madras in the case of K.M Pachayappan (supra) has considered an identical issue and by following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Trustees of H.E.H. The Nizam's Supplemental Family Trust vs. CIT (2000) 242 ITR 381, held that conclusion drawn by the Tribunal that no action could be initiated u/s.147 of the Act, when there is pendency of return before the Assessing Officer based on valid materials and facts do not call for any interference. We further noted that the Hon’ble Madras High Court while answering substantial question in favour of the assessee h…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1732/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…ssessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed under s. 143(1) of the Act only on 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 114 : (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court observed : "It is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessment under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, cannot be issued, i.e. no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of return already filed are not terminated." 5.…

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1731/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Khemka, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

…ssessment order was passed under s. 143(3) of the Act and that the return of the assessee was processed under s. 143(1) of the Act only on 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust vs. CIT (2000) 159 CTR (SC) 114 : (2000) 242 ITR 381 (SC), the Supreme Court observed : "It is settled law that unless the return of income already filed is disposed of, notice for reassessment under s. 148 of the IT Act, 1961, cannot be issued, i.e. no reassessment proceedings can be initiated so long as assessment proceedings pending on the basis of return already filed are not terminated." 5.…

11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT

What is 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing 11th June, 1996. 4. In Trustees of H.E.H. the Nizam’s Supplemental Family Trust v. CIT

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-2, Chennai

D.A.V. Educational Trust, Chennai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward-4, Chennai

Urmish M. Udani, Mumbai vs. Aci 10(3), Mumbai

Adonis Marketing (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 9(1), Kolkata

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(4), Mohali

Sh. Satnam Singh, Mohali vs. ITO, Ward 6(1), Mohali

Sarojin Satpathy, Bhubaneswar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Bhubaneswarw, Bhubaneswar

DCIT, Gurugram vs. Rajesh Kumar, Sonepat

Rajesh Kumar, Sonepat vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Gurgaon

ITO, WD.9(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Maharaj Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-6(2)(1), Bangalore vs. Sri C Gangadhara Murthy, Bangalore

The ITO, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad

Shri Rupal Bhupendrasingh Sandhu, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(11), Ahmedabad

M/S. Discoverture Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

M/S. Discoverture Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar vs. DCIT, Corporate Circle- 1(1), Bhubaneswar

Shri G Venkatesh vs. The Income Tax Officer

M/S. Emta Coal Ltd., ( Erstwhile Known As M/S. Eastern Mineral & Trading Agency ), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(1), Kolakta

Kamlesh Shantilal Jain, Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata

Pandrol Rahee Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 8(3), Kolkata