ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon

321 ITR 362Supreme Court of India2010#93 most cited

What is ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon authority for?

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) within the statutory time limit is mandatory for completing an assessment under Section 143(3), and the failure to do so renders the assessment invalid. This defect is not curable under Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

616

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2001 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon · Section 143(2) notice · mandatory compliance · assessment invalid · quashing assessment · Section 292BB · curability of defect · assessment procedure · time limit notice · Section 143(3)

Also reported as

3 SCC 259229 CTR 219188 Taxmann 13

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 147Section 143(3)Section 144Section 142(1)Section 292BBSection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 292bbsection 292bsection 158bcsection 292section 282section 29service of noticeblock periodsection 158section 127section 158bsection 142

Judgments citing ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon

PARMANAND,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD, 2(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 447/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 Apr 2026AY 2015-16
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69C

…igures disclosed in the return filed through the physical mode. Further, the Tribunal had noted, upon such defect being pointed out, the next date itself, the assessee e-verified the same. In Asst Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, (2010) 3 SCC 259, it has been held, notice u/s. 143(2) is not procedural and omission to serve that notice is not curable requirement of its issuance cannot be dispensed with. 8. In view of such facts, we find no ground to offer interference on the hair-splitting objection raised by the revenue. As to any other defect in the conclusion reached by the CIT(Appeals) a…

DCIT CIRCLE-3(1)91), BENGALURU vs. G CORP PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result is filed by the learned assessing officer is allowed

ITA 2484/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: None
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…dings, without appreciating that the original assessment had already been preceded by a valid notice under section 143(2). 2. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC), which is not applicable to the facts of the present case. The said decision pertains to block assessments under Chapter XIV-B and not to reassessment or set-aside proceedings u/s 263. 3. The learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that in the case of set- aside assessments u/s 263, there is no requirement for issuance of a fresh notice u/s…

ARUN KUMAR MAURYA,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-2(1), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 415/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 50CSection 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…on’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Laxman Das Khandelwal (2019) 108 taxmann.com 183 (SC)/(2019) 266 Taxman 171 (SC)/(2019) 417 ITR 324 (SC) and order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 188 Taxman 113 (SC)/(2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). (B.1.1) In the order of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court, which is Jurisdictional High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma (supra), the assessee had filed return much beyond the time indicated in the notice u/s 148 of the Act. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order without issuing notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The Hon’ble High Co…

VIDYA SHANKER JAISWAL, SARGUJA,SARGUJA vs. ITO, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 142/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.141 & 142/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: S/shri Yash Dhariwal &For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…s contention is bereft of any merits and completely ignores the scheme of the machinery provisions for assessment under the Act. It is now well settled by a number of decisions (See: Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr.: 283 CTR 148 (Del), ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon: 321 ITR 362 (SC) and CIT v. Pawan Gupta: 318 ITR 322 (Del)) that whenever the return filed by an Assessee is not accepted at its face, it is mandatory for the AO has to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for proceeding further. It is thus not open for the AO to not issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and proceed directly under Section…

VIDYA SHANKER JAISWAL, SARGUJA,SARGUJA vs. ITO, WARD-2, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 141/RPR/2026[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.141 & 142/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: S/shri Yash Dhariwal &For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…s contention is bereft of any merits and completely ignores the scheme of the machinery provisions for assessment under the Act. It is now well settled by a number of decisions (See: Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr.: 283 CTR 148 (Del), ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon: 321 ITR 362 (SC) and CIT v. Pawan Gupta: 318 ITR 322 (Del)) that whenever the return filed by an Assessee is not accepted at its face, it is mandatory for the AO has to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for proceeding further. It is thus not open for the AO to not issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and proceed directly under Section…

ARIMILLI RAMA KRISHNA,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

ITA 639/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 263

…for framing of an assessment. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Salarpur Cold Storage, [2015] 228 Taxman 48 (Allahabad) after relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC), held that the requirement of issuance of a notice under section 143(2) is mandatory and cannot be brought within the meaning of a procedural irregularity. Apart from that, we find that the “Special Bench” of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Raj Kumar Chawla vs. ITO (2005) 1 SOT 934 (Delhi) (SB), had held that return of income filed pursuant t…

MOHAMMED USMAN, BHILAI,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 180/RPR/2026[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Mar 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.180/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Mohammed Usman C/25, Nandini Road, Power House, Bhilai-490 011, Dist. Durg Pan: Aafpu9292H

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…s contention is bereft of any merits and completely ignores the scheme of the machinery provisions for assessment under the Act. It is now well settled by a number of decisions (See: Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr.: 283 CTR 148 (Del), ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon: 321 ITR 362 (SC) and CIT v. Pawan Gupta: 318 ITR 322 (Del)) that whenever the return filed by an Assessee is not accepted at its face, it is mandatory for the AO has to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act for proceeding further. It is thus not open for the AO to not issue a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act and proceed directly under Section…

SATYANARAYANA MURTHY ADAPA,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1263/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia(In आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1263/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Satyanarayana Murthy Adapa, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Rajahmundry. Ward-13(1), Pan: Aaypa8644C Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate (Hybrid Mode) Assessee Represented By राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr. Ar Department Represented By सुनवाईसमा"तहोनेक""त"थ/ : 05/03/2026 Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख/ : 13/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Satyanarayana Murthy Adapa (“The Assessee”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”) Dated 16/06/2025 For The A.Y. 2017-18. Satyanarayana Murthy Adapa Vs. Ito 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

Section 115BSection 127Section 143(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘SMC’ Bench, Hyderabad "ी "वजय पाल राव, उपा" य" एवं "ी मधुसूदन साव"डया, लेखा सद" य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (In आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A. No.1263/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Satyanarayana Murthy Adapa, VS. Income Tax Officer, Rajahmundry. Ward-13(1), PAN: AAYPA8644C Hyderabad. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) करदाताका""त"न"ध"व/ : Shri GVN Hari, Advocate (Hybrid mode) Assessee Represented by राज"वका""त"न"ध"व/ : Ms. Reema Yadav, Sr. AR Departmen…

SHEELA GOYAL,CHANDIGARH vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 690/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 690/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sheela Goyal, The Pcit, 3180, Sector 28-D, बनाम Chandigarh Chandigarh Vs. "थायी लेखा सं./ Pan No: Aaypg0407H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel, Cit Dr (Virtual Mode) सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.01.2026 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12.03.2026

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajat Kumar Kureel, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…essment order just for the sake of completing the assessment admitted by the Id. A.O. himself, so passing of assessment order without issuing notice u/s 143(2) is a void-ab-initio order as per the judgment of Hon'ble SC in the case of ACIT vs Hotel Blue Moon: 321 ITR 362, therefore, question of revision u/s 263 of void-ab-initio assessment order does not arise at all. 2. The Id. CIT is wrong in passing revision order u/s 263 by setting-aside the assessment order and directing the assessing officer to pass fresh assessment order, without appreciating the fact that the Id. assessing officer can not issue any notice…

DAYA THOURANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per afore-stated terms

ITA 1/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Daya Thourani Thourani Niwas, Near Mla Rest House, Tagore Nagar, Raipur-492 001 (C.G.) Pan: Ablpt6191R

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 151Section 282Section 282A(1)

…respondents u/s.148 of the Act, order dated 02.04.2022 under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act and notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act.” 11. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that 13 Daya Thourani Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Raipur (C.G.) issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held that issuance…

ADIMULAM SATYANARAYANA PROPRIETOR,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, VIZIANAGARAM

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

ITA 472/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 115BSection 13Section 133(6)Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69A

…2) of the Act, which, as observed by me he ought to have issued by accepting and acting upon the aforesaid return of income, the said issue is clearly covered by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT and Anr. Vs. Botel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC) and CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (2019) 417 ITR 325 (SC) and is no more res integra. The Hon’ble Apex Court in its aforesaid judicial pronouncements had held, that the AO pursuant to the return of income filed by the assessee remains under the statutory obligation to issue notice under section 143(2) of the Act for framing the assessment.…

JYOTI SHROFF,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 29,, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal stands dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue

ITA 2278/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Jyoti Shroff Dcit, Circle-29, Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…had issued notice under Section 143(2) of the Act before taking up the scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3). Before we go into the facts, we take note of the legal position as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asst. CIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 321 ITR 362 [SC], wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that omission on the part of the assessing officer to issue notice under Section 143(2) cannot be a procedural irregularity and the same is not curable and, therefore, the requirement of notice under Section 143(2) cannot be dispensed with. Further, we also take note of the decision in the case of Comm…

ACIT-23(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. JAGRUTI KIRTI SHAH, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6125/MUM/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gunjjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Nakul Agrawal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…r section 143(2) of the Act and also for the reason that the jurisdiction of these cases lies with the ITO and not the DCIT. 7.6 It is trite to say that as per dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 188 Taxman 113/321 ITR 362, the notice under section 143(2) of the Act is mandatory for making the assessment and therefore the same is required to be issued by the Assessing Officer, who has jurisdiction and is empowered to issue the notice under section 143(2) of the Act and to make the assessment. Hence, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality speci…

JAGRUTI KIRTI SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-23(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 5844/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gunjjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri Nakul Agrawal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…r section 143(2) of the Act and also for the reason that the jurisdiction of these cases lies with the ITO and not the DCIT. 7.6 It is trite to say that as per dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Asstt. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 188 Taxman 113/321 ITR 362, the notice under section 143(2) of the Act is mandatory for making the assessment and therefore the same is required to be issued by the Assessing Officer, who has jurisdiction and is empowered to issue the notice under section 143(2) of the Act and to make the assessment. Hence, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality speci…

G.T. REALITY PRIVATE LIMITED, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per afore-stated terms

ITA 95/RPR/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur25 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.95/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 G.T Reality Private Limited 23, G.T. Shopping Plaza, Avanti Bai Chowk, Kapa, Raipur (C.G.)-492 007 Pan: Aadcg9139N

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 151Section 282Section 282A(1)

…respondents u/s.148 of the Act, order dated 02.04.2022 under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act and notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act.” 11. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that 12 G.T Reality Private Limited Vs. DCIT, CC-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held t…

RAMAN VASU THACHISARIL, KOLLAM, KOLLAM vs. ITO, WARD- JAGDALPUR, JAGDALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 91/RPR/2026[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.91/Rpr/2026 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12 Raman Vasu Thachisaril Ramanalayam Clappana, Kollam, Amrithapuri S.O-690 546 Kerala, India Pan: Adopt0795N

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 282A(1)

…respondents u/s.148 of the Act, order dated 02.04.2022 under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act and notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act.” 11. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that 18 Shri Raman Vasu Thachisaril Vs. ITO, Ward-Jagdalpur issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held that issua…

FIROJ ALAM, BHILAI,DURG vs. ITO-2(1), BHILAI, DURG

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 830/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.830/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Firoj Alam H. No.0, Hathkhoj, Indira Nagar, Bhilai-490 026 Pan: Bgmpa0920J

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 282A(1)

…respondents u/s.148 of the Act, order dated 02.04.2022 under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act and notice dated 21.03.2022 issued under clause (b) of section 148A of the Act.” 11. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Also, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held that issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is mandatory in re…

SUDHIR KUMAR SINGHAL,GURUGRAM, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 401/RPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.401/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sudhir Kumar Singhal Flat No.827/4, Urban Estate Sector-4, Grugram (Formerly Known As Gurgaon) Haryana-123 001 Pan: Akxps6012R

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…ITO, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.) u/s. 143(2) of the Act, does not hold the ground and is absolutely incorrect and misplaced in the given facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case. 9. We find that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362 (SC) has held that issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is sine-qua-non for framing of an assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act. Similarly, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Shaily Juneja Vs. ACIT, (2024) 167 taxmann.com 90 (Delhi) has dealt with the similar issue and held that issuance of notice u/s.143(2) of the Act is mandatory in…

GOAL ORIENTED TRADE LINK PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2576/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 158Section 250

…he assessment framed by the AO as invalid and nullity in the eyes of law. The case of the assessee is squarely covered by the following decisions: - a). In the case of Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 188 Taxman 113 (SC)/[2010] 321 ITR 362 (SC)/[2010] 229 CTR 219 (SC)[02-02-2010], wherein it has held as under:- “15. We may now revert back to Section 158 BC(b) which is the material provision which requires our consideration. Section 158 BC(b) provides for enquiry and assessment. The said provision reads "that the assessing officer shall proceed to determine the undisclosed income o…

SHRIDHAR FINANCIAL SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 23(3), DELHI

Appeal is allowed

ITA 216/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 216/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Shridhar Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, 401, Fourth Floor, Arunachal Ward -23(3), Building, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcs7408J Assessee By: Sh. Pawan Garg, Ca & Ms. Kanishika Garg, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement: 10.02.2026 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19 Arises Against The Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi’S Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2025-26/1082375330(1) Dated 07.11.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Pawan Garg, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147

…y dispute that even the learned assessing authority has tabulated a list of all the opportunities given to the assessee wherein there is no such mention a notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Act forming a mandatory condition as per ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC). I thus quash the impugned assessment for the precise reason. Ordered accordingly. 5. All other remaining issue between the parties stand rendered academic. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 10/02/2026. (Satbeer Singh Godara) Judicial Member Dated: 10/02/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS*…

Showing 1–20 of 616 · Page 1 of 31

...