Abhishek Jain v. ITO

94 Taxmann.com 355High Court2018#1276 most cited

What is Abhishek Jain v. ITO authority for?

An assessee cannot challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer if an objection is not filed within the prescribed one-month period from the date of receiving a notice. Failure to raise a timely objection under Section 124 before the AO waives the right to dispute jurisdiction later.

89

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Abhishek Jain v. ITO · Section 124 · objection to jurisdiction · one month period · waiver of jurisdiction challenge · Assessing Officer's jurisdiction · Section 124(3) · Section 127 · timely objection · assessment procedure

Also reported as

405 ITR 1

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 124(3)Section 148Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 69A

Issues it is cited on

section 124(3)section 115wfsection 115whsection 124(1)section 124section 124(3)(a)section 120(1)section 115wdsection 115wesection 127(1)section 2(7a)section 144c(15)

Judgments citing Abhishek Jain v. ITO

Mahavir Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), New Delhi

ITA 8602/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Singhla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…sment proceedings to be carried by ITO, Noida and vide letter dated 13.11.2017, requested that the assessment be completed by the Delhi based AO. In this regard, reference is made to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Abhishek Jain vs ITO 405 ITR 1 [2018], in WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 11844/2016, wherein vide Order dated 01.06.2018, it has been held that- “37. The view we have taken, finds support from the decision of the Patna High Court in Mahalliram Ramniranjan Das vs. CIT (1985) 156 ITR 885, wherein the decision of Delhi High Court in Kanji Mai & Son's case (supra) was referred to. Refere…

Shri Kishan, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3030/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Kishan S/O Late Jagmal Vs Income Tax Officer Singh, H. No.112, Near Shiv Ward- 4 (2) Mandir, Village & P.O. Gurgaon Nakhrola, Tehsil, Manesar Distt. Gurgaon – 122001 Pan No. Aaacp0165G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Manoj Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Ward-2 (4) Village P & O. Nakhrola Gurgaon Tehsil Manesar Gurgaon-122001 Pan No. Atvpm1063B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 548Section 54B

…, copy of family member chart and copy of ancestral evidence. 8. The Ld DR has submitted that assessee’s have not challenged the jurisdiction of the AO now they could not raise this issue. The reliance has placed on the judgment of Abhishek Jain vs ITO (2018)94 Taxmann.com 355. In the matter Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that Jurisdiction would depend upon the place where the person carries on the business or profession or the areas in which he is residing. The Section 124(3) provides that no person shall be entitled to call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer after the expiry of the time allowe…

Manoj Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3029/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Kishan S/O Late Jagmal Vs Income Tax Officer Singh, H. No.112, Near Shiv Ward- 4 (2) Mandir, Village & P.O. Gurgaon Nakhrola, Tehsil, Manesar Distt. Gurgaon – 122001 Pan No. Aaacp0165G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Manoj Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Ward-2 (4) Village P & O. Nakhrola Gurgaon Tehsil Manesar Gurgaon-122001 Pan No. Atvpm1063B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 548Section 54B

…, copy of family member chart and copy of ancestral evidence. 8. The Ld DR has submitted that assessee’s have not challenged the jurisdiction of the AO now they could not raise this issue. The reliance has placed on the judgment of Abhishek Jain vs ITO (2018)94 Taxmann.com 355. In the matter Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that Jurisdiction would depend upon the place where the person carries on the business or profession or the areas in which he is residing. The Section 124(3) provides that no person shall be entitled to call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer after the expiry of the time allowe…

Lord Vishnu Construction Pvt Ltd, Patna vs. Pr. CIT-1, Patna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 23/PAT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 23/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lord Vishnu Constructions Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Private Limited Vs Patna 101, Lotus Apartment New Patliputra Colony Patna - 800013 [Pan: Aabcc5141M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, Jcit D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 22/05/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per, Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Patna -1 (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”) Dt. 18/10/2022, Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Through Various Grounds Of Appeal, The Assessee Has Assailed The Order Of The Ld. Pr. Cit Framed U/S 263 Of The Act. Facts In Brief Are That The Assessee Is A Private Limited Company Engaged In Construction Business. The Regular Return Of Income Furnished Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass On Account Of Two Reasons, Namely, “Abnormal Increase In Cash Deposit During

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT D/R
Section 263Section 40A(3)Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “पटना“ "यायपीठ पटना IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA (Heard from Kolkata Benches through web-based video conferencing platform) ] ] SHRI DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & BEFORE SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 23/Pat/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Lord Vishnu Constructions Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Private Limited Vs Patna 101, Lotus Apartment New Patliputra Colony Patna - 800013 [PAN: AABCC5141M] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Nishant Maitin, C.A. Revenue by : Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra, JCIT…

Addl CIT R G 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd ( Formerly Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd. ), Mumbai

ITA 6772/MUM/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2024AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Novartis India Limited V. Asst. Commissioner Of Income –Tax - 7(2)(2) {Earlier Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} 6Th& 7Th Floor 1St Floor, Aayakar Bhavan Inspire Bkc M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 “G” Block, Bkc Main Road Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (E) Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1) V. M/S. Novartis India Limited Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No.190/Mum/2011 [Arising Out Of Ita No.6772/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2002-03)] M/S. Novartis India Limited V. Addl. Commissioner Of Income –Tax – 7(1)} Room No. 622, Aayakar Bhavan {Earlier Known As Hindustan Ciba Giegy Ltd.,} Sandoz House, Dr. A.B. Road M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Worli, Mumbai – 400018 Pan: Aaach2914F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2

…e where the dispute was whether the assessing officer Act, reliance has been placed on in Delhi or in Noida had jurisdiction over the assessee's judgment of the Delhi High Court in case. In that case, the officer in Noida has been held to Abhishek Jain Vs ITO 405 ITR 1, assume concurrent jurisdiction over the assessee's case Allahabad High Court in CIT Vs British because the addition related to deposit of cash in a bank India Corporation and the Calcutta account at Noida, especially, when the assessee had not High Court in Elite Pharmaceuticals Vs disclosed his permanent account number and also not ITO (2016) 73…

Swatantravir Savarkar Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Nashik

Accordingly. The assessee’s “lead” appeal ITA.No.881/PUN./2023 is dismissed in above terms

ITA 882/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Smt. Neha Deshpande
Section 124(3)(a)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 80A(5)Section 80P

…appeal.” 4. The assessee’s first and foremost grievance in both these appeals challenges the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction herein framing the impugned twin assessment(s). Hon’ble Delhi high court’s landmark decision in Abhishek Jain vs. ITO & Anr. [2018] 405 ITR 1 (Del.) has settled the law that such a challenge to the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction has to be raised within the specified time limits u/sec.124(3)(a) and (b); as the case may be. The assessee has admittedly not complied with the foregoing statutory 4 ITA.No.881 & 882/PUN./2023 provision(s). It’s instant second substantive ground(s) fails in v…

Swatantravir Savarkar Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Nashik vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Nashik

Accordingly. The assessee’s “lead” appeal ITA.No.881/PUN./2023 is dismissed in above terms

ITA 881/PUN/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Smt. Neha Deshpande
Section 124(3)(a)Section 127Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 80A(5)Section 80P

…appeal.” 4. The assessee’s first and foremost grievance in both these appeals challenges the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction herein framing the impugned twin assessment(s). Hon’ble Delhi high court’s landmark decision in Abhishek Jain vs. ITO & Anr. [2018] 405 ITR 1 (Del.) has settled the law that such a challenge to the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction has to be raised within the specified time limits u/sec.124(3)(a) and (b); as the case may be. The assessee has admittedly not complied with the foregoing statutory 4 ITA.No.881 & 882/PUN./2023 provision(s). It’s instant second substantive ground(s) fails in v…

Vijay Pal, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as

ITA 3033/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3033/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Vijay Pal, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-4(4), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Anvpp7279G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3031/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Raj Singh, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-3(3), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Bjdps1075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3032/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito Hariom, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-2(1), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Afuph1298A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 54B

…in counter to the submissions made by the Ld. AR. It is stated that the Assessees never raised any objection towards assumptions of jurisdiction at the time of assessment. Ld. DR cited the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (405 ITR 1) in support of his arguments to say that the assumption of jurisdiction by the AOs at Gurgaon was quite in order and beyond reproach. 15. In rejoinder Ld. Counsel for the Assessees submitted that the distribution of jurisdiction among the administrative authorities was not limited to territory alone but it also depended on the nature of income. S…

Hariom, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as

ITA 3032/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3033/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Vijay Pal, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-4(4), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Anvpp7279G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3031/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Raj Singh, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-3(3), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Bjdps1075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3032/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito Hariom, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-2(1), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Afuph1298A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 54B

…in counter to the submissions made by the Ld. AR. It is stated that the Assessees never raised any objection towards assumptions of jurisdiction at the time of assessment. Ld. DR cited the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (405 ITR 1) in support of his arguments to say that the assumption of jurisdiction by the AOs at Gurgaon was quite in order and beyond reproach. 15. In rejoinder Ld. Counsel for the Assessees submitted that the distribution of jurisdiction among the administrative authorities was not limited to territory alone but it also depended on the nature of income. S…

Raj Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed as

ITA 3031/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3033/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Vijay Pal, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-4(4), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Anvpp7279G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3031/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito, Raj Singh, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-3(3), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Bjdps1075G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3032/Del/2017 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Vs. Ito Hariom, S/O Late Sh. Manohar Lal, Ward-2(1), Village & P.O. Nakhrola, Gurgaon. Tehsil Manesar, Gurgaon. Pan No.Afuph1298A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 54B

…in counter to the submissions made by the Ld. AR. It is stated that the Assessees never raised any objection towards assumptions of jurisdiction at the time of assessment. Ld. DR cited the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (405 ITR 1) in support of his arguments to say that the assumption of jurisdiction by the AOs at Gurgaon was quite in order and beyond reproach. 15. In rejoinder Ld. Counsel for the Assessees submitted that the distribution of jurisdiction among the administrative authorities was not limited to territory alone but it also depended on the nature of income. S…

Staark Accessories Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle 13(2)(2)

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

ITA 2418/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Staark Accessories Pvt. Ltd., A-20, Virwani Industrial Estate Goregaon East, Mumbai- 400063, Pan: Aatcs1816J ...... Appellant Vs. Acit-13(2) (2), Aayakar Bhavan, Maharishi Karve Road, Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ashwin S. Chhag, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Ld. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 250Section 44A

…e provision seeks to eliminate." This view regarding section 124(3) was also upheld by Allahabad High Court in case of Shivaaditya Jems and Jewellery (P) Ltd. [2022] 143 Taxmann.com 64(Allahabad) and by Delhi High Court in case of Abhishek Jain by ITO (2018) 94 Taxmann.com 355/405 ITR (1). Furthermore, in case of Shivaaditya Jems and Jewellery(P) Ltd. [2022] 143 Taxmann.com 64 (Allahabad), honourable Allahabad High Court opined that instruction no. 1/2011 dated 31/1 / 2011 was issued for the sole purpose of fixing pecuniary limit for the purpose of distribution of works between officers and it would not mean tha…

Shiva Ranjani Vejja, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 267/HYD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. AR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No.267/Hyd/2020 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shiva Ranjani Vejja, The Income Tax Officer, C/o. Mohd Afzal, Advocate, Vs. Ward – 12(2), #402, Sherson’s Residency, Hyderabad. 11-5-465, Criminal Court Road, Red Hills, Hyderabad – 04. PAN : AFEPK5164L अपीलधर्थी / Assessee प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. A…

Shri Arun Agrawal, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur

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

ITA 214/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 214/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Arun Agrawal 85, Pandri Textile Market, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan :Acjpa2323D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 69

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ “एक-सद"य” मामला रायपुर म" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR "ी रवीश सूद, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 214/RPR/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shri Arun Agrawal 85, Pandri Textile Market, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) PAN :ACJPA2323D .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, CA Revenue by : Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 25.09.2023 घोषणा क" त…

Sh. Sachin Sharma, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 3, Bhiwani

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 186/DEL/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Shri Sachin Sharma, Vs Ito, C/O-Umang Sahai Aggarwal, Adv., Ward-3, 505, Maitri Apartment, Opp. Metro Bhiwani. Pillar No.411, Sector-09, Rohini, Delhi-110085. Pan-Bnyps6223F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri U.S.Aggarwal, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.09.2023 Order

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “SMC” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Shri Sachin Sharma, vs ITO, C/o-Umang Sahai Aggarwal, Adv., Ward-3, 505, Maitri Apartment, Opp. Metro Bhiwani. Pillar No.411, Sector-09, Rohini, Delhi-110085. PAN-BNYPS6223F APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri U.S.Aggarwal, Adv. Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 21.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement 27.09.2023 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : The present appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010- 11 is directed against the order passed by Ld.CIT(A)-5,…

Mukesh Kumar Jain, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Ward 5(2), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1698/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1698/Chny/2019 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Shri Mukesh Kumar Jain Dcit बनाम 46, Deewan Rama Road, Corporate Ward-5(2), / Vs. Purasawalkam, Chennai-600 084. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aajpm-5477-E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Uttamchand Jain (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21-09-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Uttamchand Jain (CA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DR
Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…, the reassessment jurisdiction could not be sustained in law. Therefore, we quash the impugned assessment order and allow the corresponding legal grounds urged by the assessee. The case law of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (94 Taxmann.com 355), as referred to by Ld. Sr. DR, would not help the case of the revenue since in the present case, the reopening has been done by non-jurisdictional officer and that too in a mechanical manner. Therefore, this case law is of no assistance to further the case of the revenue. 7. Since we have quashed impugned assessment order, delving into o…

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai vs. M/S Thulasi & Others, Chennai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 18/CHNY/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Sept 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.18/Chny/2021 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dcit M/S. Thulasi & Others बनाम/ 32, (Old No.43), 2Nd Floor, Non-Corporate Circle-8(1) Chennai. K.Bharathidasan Salai, Siet College Road Vs. Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaofm-9784-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-06-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-09-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate)-Ld.AR
Section 124Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 47

…s on record. Accordingly, the conclusion that notice u/s 148 was issued mechanically without due application of find could not be faulted with. 7. The Ld. Sr. DR has referred to the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Abhishek Jain vs. ITO (94 Taxmann.com 355) which held that in terms of Sec. 124(3)(b), the assessee could not call in question the jurisdiction of an Assessing Officer after expiry of one month from date of service of reassessment notice. However, in the present case, the reassessment notice has been issued at old address and the assessment order is an ex-parte order. The assessee…

K.Suganthi, Chennai vs. ACIT Circle 1, Salem

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1161/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Smt. T.V. Muthu Abirami, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Section 127Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…ed fully and truly all the material particulars that are necessary for assessment for the relevant assessment year. 7. On the other hand, the ld.Senior DR heavily relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Abhishek Jain vs. ITO, [2018] 405 ITR 1(Delhi). 8. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the ACIT, Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Chennai issued notice u/s.148 of the Act (copy of I.T.A. No.1161/Chny/2019 11 which is available in the assessee’s paper-book at page 4) dated 31.03.2017 and the relevant address of noticee u/s.148 of…

M/S. Chandrika Investments vs. The Income-Tax Officer

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/103/2017HC Karnataka28 Jul 2023

Bench: P.S.DINESH KUMAR,T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

Section 133ASection 260

…I.T.A No.103/2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY 2023 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.103 OF 2017 BETWEEN: M/S. CHANDRIKA INVESTMENTS REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. I. HARISHCHANDRA SHETTY NO.8/A, 24TH MAIN 1ST PHASE, J.P. NAGAR BANGALORE-560 078 …APPELLANT (BY SHRI. A. SHAN…

Sri. Annesh, Udupi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmangalur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1179/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 124Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 234

…d-1, Chikmagalur, has not issued a fresh notice U/s 148 of the act, to continue with the reassessment proceedings. 3.4 The revenue has sought to place reliance upon the decision in the case of Abhishek Jain v. Income-tax officer, Ward-55(1), New Delhi [2018] 405 ITR 1 (Delhi) WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 11844 OF 2016 JUNE 1, 2018, for the proposition that the jurisdiction cannot be questioned after a month of issuance of the 148 notice. 3.5 The assessee has filed a case law compilation on the legal issues and has relied upon the decision in Charu K Bagadia v ACIT, [2022] 448 ITR 563 (Madras) dated 27/06/2022, whi…

Jagannath Krishnaji Deore, Pune vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2091/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & G.D.Padmahshaliआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2091/Pun/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 45(2)Section 50C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण“ए”"ायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND G.D.PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.2091/PUN/2019 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Jagannath Krishnaji Deore, DCIT, Circle-2, At A-22, Vrindavan Hsg. Soc., Vs Pune Panchavati, Pashan, Pune 411 021 PAN : AFZPD3477N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Ajay Singh & Shri Deepak S. Sasar Revenue by Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde – DR Date of hearing 28-11-2022 Date of pronouncement 07-12-2022 आदेश/ ORDER Per S.S.Godara, JM: This assessee’s app…