Which sections of the Income Tax Act does 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(23C), Section 115BBC, Section 12AA, Section 139, Section 143(3), Section 147.

296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

Q: How many judgments cite 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT?

12 judgments on BharatTax cite 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (323 ITR 331), spanning 2015 to 2025.

323 ITR 331High Court2010#8979 most cited

What is 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot proceed with reassessment proceedings without first disposing of the assessee's objections to the reopening with a speaking order. The Assessing Officer must decide preliminary objections on jurisdiction and merits before undertaking reassessment.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Martech Peripherals v. DCIT · 323 ITR 331 · Gujarat High Court · reassessment · objections to reopening · speaking order · Section 148 · Section 147 · disposal of objections · natural justice

Sections most often in play

Section 10(23C)Section 115BBC Section 12AA Section 139 Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 148 Section 153

Judgments citing 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT

S K N Sikshan Sansthan, Bhadhadhar vs. Dy. Commissioner Income Tax (Central)-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 445/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarskn Shikshan Sansthan, 1, N. H. 11 Bhadhadar Sikar 332 315 Pan No.: Aamts 1103L ...... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Mr. Shafi Mohammad, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT

Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 57

…geable to tax had escaped assessment for any AY., that the assessee is entitled to counter those reasons by filing a reply, that it has to be adjudicated upon by the AO by a reasoned order, before he proceeds to make the assessment. In the case of MGM Export (323 ITR 331) the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, found that upon receipt of the reasons recorded, the assessee preferred objections, both on jurisdiction and on the merits, that the assessee passed the assessment order without disposing the objections. The Hon’ble Court held that the AO was required to decide the preliminary ITA No. 445-JP-2025 SKN Sikshan San…

The ACIT, Central-1, Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 232/IND/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

…State Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. ACIT [2017] 88 taxmann.com 690 (Bombay) (v) Gujarat Eco Textile Park Ltd. v. ACIT [2015] 60 taxmann.com 296 (Gujarat) (vi) Martech Peripherals (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 73 (Madras) (vii) Mgm Exports v. DCIT [2010] 323 ITR 331 (Gujarat) (viii) Rabo India Finance Ltd. v. DCIT [2012] 27 taxmann.com 163 (Bombay) (ix) Vishwanath Engineers v. ACIT [2012] 21 taxmann.com 5 (Gujarat) Accordingly, the Ld. Counsel contended that reassessment proceedings initiated in the case of the assessee were not maintainable on multiple grounds as discussed hereinabove. 53 Surya Infraven…

The Ait, Entral-1, Indore vs. Surya Infraventure P Ltd, Indore

ITA 217/IND/2021[201-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

The ACIT, Circle 2(1), Indore vs. M/S Surya Infra Venture Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 216/IND/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

Section 143(3)Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

M/S. Gokaldas Images Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Bangalore

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2359/BANG/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kulkarni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 10BSection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…sal of the objections raised by the appellant are not followed by the assessing officer. A failure to do so will result in the invalidation of the assessment us! 147 of the Act. Kind reference is invited to the decisions in 259 ITR 19 (SC), 326 ITR 553 (Del), 323 ITR 331 (Guj) and the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in WA No.1725/2017 (IT) dated 15.03.2017 (copy enclosed). Para 11 of the Judgment reads as under: "If the facts of the present case are examined in the light of aforesaid legal position, it is an admitted position that the reasons for re-opening of the assessment by issuing of the notice und…

Biography Investments Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1847/AHD/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2005-06

For Appellant: Gyan Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: S.K. Dev, Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148Section 69

…e Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft India Ltd. vs. ITO 259 ITR 19 (SC) failing which the assessment could not be sustained as held by the jurisdictional High Court i.e. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MGM Exports vs. Dy. CIT (2010) 323 ITR 331 (Gui.l 3. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating and/or giving findings on the ground of appeal contending that the AO had erred in not furnishing the copy of entire material gathered as a result of enquiries conducted u/s. 133(6) of the Act and in not granting an opportunity of cross-examination of the persons/entities from whom the enqui…

Biography Investments Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 42/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Nov 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Uma Shankar Prasad

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68Section 69

…the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft India Ltd. vs. ITO 259 ITR 19 (SC) failing which the assessment could not be sustained as held by the Jurisdictional High Court i.e. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MGM Exports vs. Dy. CIT(2010)323 ITR 331 (Guj.) 5. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in not adjudicating and/or giving findings on the ground of appeal contending that the AO had erred in not furnishing the copy of entire material gathered as a result of enquiries conducted u/s.133(6) of the Act and in not granting an opportunity of cross- examination of the persons/entities from whom the enquir…

Narendrakumar Sohanraj Choudhary, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2192/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Smt. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2192/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10)

For Appellant: Shri P. D. Shah, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 147

…not have framed the re- assessment order without doing so. Similar issue was cropped up again before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court for its consideration in the case of Arvind Mills Ltd. vs. ACWT 270 ITR 467 & Ors. (Guj.) and recently in MGM Exports vs. DCIT 323 ITR 331 (Guj). Applying the legal position as laid down in GKN Driveshafts (supra), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held the action of the AO in framing the re-assessment order without first disposing of the preliminary objections raised by the assessee to be unsustainable in law. Accordingly, the Hon’ble High Court quashed and set aside the re-ass…

Dr. Bharat Ratilal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 786/AHD/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Jignesh M. Shah, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

Nalinkumar Ramniklal Shah, Ahmedabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Surendranagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3128/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Dec 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3128/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2006-07)

For Appellant: Shri Ankit Talsania, A.R

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 40A(3)

…laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft India Ltd. vs. ITO 259 ITR 19 (SC), the assessment could not be sustained as held by the jurisdictional High Court i.e. Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MGM Exports vs. Dy. CIT(2010)323 ITR 331 (Guj.). 3. The ld. CIT(A) has also erred in not commenting upon or adjudicating the appellant's contention that the assessment having been ITA No.3128/Ahd/2014 [Nalinkumar Ramniklal Shah vs. ITO] A.Y. 2006-07 - 3 - reopened on the basis of Audit Objection, the same cannot form a basis for the Assessing Officer to believe that the income chargeab…

M/S Vijaya Woven Sacks Pvt. Ltd., Mangalore vs. ITO, Mangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessees are allowed

ITA 474/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. S. Venkatesan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. K. R. Narayan, JCIT

Section 147Section 148Section 153C

…ees had objected to the reopening, AO could not have proceeded with the assessment unless and until such objections were disposed off through a separate speaking order. Relying on the judgments of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MGM Exports v. DCIT [323 ITR 331], General Motors P. Ltd v. DCIT [354 ITR 244], as well as Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rabo India Finance Ltd [346 ITR 81], Ld. AR submitted that unless and until the objections against reassessment filed by the assessees were disposed off, reassessment orders could not have been validly done. Further according to him, assessees’ requ…

Mahendra C. Gala, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 19(3), Mumbai

ITA 6590/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 2002-03

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh SanghaviFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap-(DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, बी बी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण बी बी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मुंबई मुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI-“B”,BENCH सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं एवं शि"जीत डे, "याियक सद"य एवं एवं Before S/Sh. Rajendra,Accountant Member & Shaktijit Dey,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं/.ITA No.6590/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/Assessment Year-2002-03 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Mahendra C. Gala ACIT-19(3) R. Sanghvi & Co. Room No.305, 3rd Floor CA’s , 104 Rizvi Chambers, No.2 Vs Piramal Chambers Jain Mandir Marg Mumbai-400 012.…