How many judgments cite 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT?

63 judgments on BharatTax cite 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT (225 ITR 496), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 131, Section 132, Section 133(6), Section 139, Section 142(1), Section 143(3).

147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT

225 ITR 496High Court1997#1814 most cited

What is 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT authority for?

Under the amended Section 147, a reassessment notice issued under Section 148 is illegal if it is served more than four years after the end of the relevant assessment year, particularly when the original assessment was completed under Section 143(3), due to the proviso to Section 147.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT · Rakesh Aggarwal 225 ITR 496 · Section 147 reassessment · Section 148 notice · amended Section 147 · proviso to Section 147 · four year limitation · original assessment Section 143(3) · reassessment legality · Delhi High Court

Sections most often in play

Section 131 Section 132 Section 133(6)Section 139 Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 11(4)section 4a section 147(b)section 31(3)section 164(2)section 11(6)advancement of general public utility section 153(3)section 139(3)section 44bb section 44b

Judgments citing 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asstt. CIT

DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs. M/S Cheviot Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of revenue are dismissed and COs of assessee are allowed

ITA 530/KOL/2012[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2016AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kr. Pande, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Ltd. AY 2003-04 & 2004-05 This new section has made a radical departure from the original section 147 inasmuch as clauses (a) and (b) of the original section 147 have been deleted and a new proviso added to section 147. In Rakesh Aggarwal v. Asst. CIT [1997] 225 ITR 496, the Delhi High Court held that in view of the proviso to section 147 notice for reassess- ment under section 147/148 should only be issued in accordance with the new section 147, and where the original assessment had been made under section 143(3) then in view of the proviso to section 147, the notice under section 148 would be illegal if issued…

M/S. State Bank of Mauritius Ltd, Mumbai vs. The Dy DIT (Int Tax) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3138/MUM/2008[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2015AY 1996-1997

For Appellant: Shri P.J.PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek A. Perumpurna

Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…(SC); G. Suresh vs. CIT 252 ITR 230 (Ker) and Dr. Amin's Pathology Laboratory vs. P.N. Prasad & Others 202 ITR 73 (Born). In fact, as noted by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bawa Abhai Singh vs. DCIT 253 ITR 83 and also in Rakesh Agarwal vs. ACIT 225 ITR 496, the provisions of section 147, as amended with effect from 01.04.1989, are contextually different and & ITA No.3138/08 the cumulative conditions spelt out in clauses (a) and (b) of section 147 prior to its amendment are not present in the amended provision. The only condition for action is that the Assessing Officer should have reasons to believ…

M/S. State Bank of Mauritius Ltd., Mumbai vs. DDIT (I.T) RG. 0 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5459/MUM/2005[1996-1997]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Oct 2015AY 1996-1997

For Appellant: Shri P.J.PardiwalaFor Respondent: Shri Vivek A. Perumpurna

Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148