18. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal v. ITO

221 TTJ 687Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2023#23707 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2023.

Issues it is cited on

section 124(3)section 124section 120section 119income-tax officersection 12section 142assistant commissionerappeal before the tribunalsection 143(2)transfersection 143

Judgments citing 18. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal v. ITO

Mickey Shrivastva, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 122/RPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 194C(5)Section 253Section 40a

…Crystal Phosphates Ltd. [2023] 332 CTR 215 (P&H HC); iii) iv) Sunita Finlease Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 491 (Chhattisgarh HC); v) Ravi Sherwani, ITA No.64/RPR/2020, order dated 29.05.2023; vi) Sudhir Kumar Agrawal, ITA No.158/RPR/2017, order dated 17.10.2022/[2023] 221 TTJ 687 (Raipur-Trib); and vii) Durga Manikanta Traders, ITA No.59/RPR/2019, order dated 12.12.2022; 19. In view of the above submissions, it was the prayer of the ld. AR that since the notice u/s.143(2) of the Act itself was invalid, the assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 23.09.2013, is illegal, non- est, bad in law, and deserves to be quash…

M/S Mata Road Carriers, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 79/BIL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur10 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)

For Respondent: Shri N.C.Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…Crystal Phosphates Ltd. [2023] 332 CTR 215 (P&H HC); iii) iv) Sunita Finlease Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 491 (Chhattisgarh HC); v) Ravi Sherwani, ITA No.64/RPR/2020, order dated 29.05.2023; vi) Sudhir Kumar Agrawal, ITA No.158/RPR/2017, order dated 17.10.2022/[2023] 221 TTJ 687 (Raipur-Trib); and vii) Durga Manikanta Traders, ITA No.59/RPR/2019, order dated 12.12.2022; 13. In view of the above submissions, it was the prayer of the ld. AR that since the notice u/s.143(2) of the Act itself was invalid, the assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 27.03.2014, is illegal, non- est, bad in law, and deserves to be quash…

Ravi Sherwani, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax -4(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 64/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 64/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ravi Sherwani H-26, Rajeev Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Azbps6703J .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-4(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…18-3-20 15. Soma Roy (2020) ITA No.462/Kol/2019 (Kol-Trib) dt. 08-01-2020. 16. Sukumar Ch. Sahoo (2017) 60 ITR (T) 225 (Kol-Trib) dt.27-09-2017 17. Krishnendu Chowdhury (2017) 78 taxmann.com 89 (Kol-Trib) date18-11-2016 18. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal Vs. ITO (2023) 221 TTJ 687 ( Raipur-Trib) 19. Durga Manikanta Traders Vs. ITO, ITA No.59/RPR/2019 dated 12.12.2022 20. Chowaram Dhiwar Vs. ITO, ITA No.31/RPR/2022 dated 28.12.2022 8. It was further submitted by the Ld. AR that as the aforesaid CBDT Instruction No.1/2011, dated 31.01.2011 r.w Instruction No. 6/2011, dated 08.04.2011 were binding on the department, therefor…

18. Sudhir Kumar Agrawal v. ITO (221 TTJ 687) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax