CIT v. Avi-Oil India P. Ltd.

323 ITR 242High Court2010#11488 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,487 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2019.

Judgments citing CIT v. Avi-Oil India P. Ltd.

Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 633/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2009-10 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 8(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Acipm 3813 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vikash Modi Revenue By: Smt. V. Aparna Date Of Hearing: 04/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2019 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Of The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 8, Hyderabad, Dated, 16/02/2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Had Sold A Property Situated At Kondapur Grampanchayat, Serilingampally Mandal, Rr District Vide Sale Deed No. 4100/2008 Dated 5Th June, 2008 For A Consideration Of Rs. 15,48,000/-, Whereas The Guideline Value Of The Property As Adopted By The Stamp Valuation Authority Was Rs. 50,56,000/-. Since The Assessee Did Not Offer Any Capital Gains On This Transaction To Tax, Ao Initiated Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 On 24/03/2016, Which Was Served On The Assessee By Way Of Affixture At The Last Known Address & Thereafter Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued On 09/05/2016. Since There Was No Reply From The Assessee, A 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd..

For Appellant: Shri Vikash ModiFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)Section 50C

…Also in the case of CIT Vs. Hotline International P. Ltd., [296 ITR 333] (Del), it was held that “Without making any efforts to serve the notice to assessee, service of notice by affixture is not correct”. (vii) In the case of CIT Vs. Avi-Oil India P. Ltd., [323 ITR 242] (P&H), it was held that – where there is no personal service of notice and notice is served by affixture without any proof of serving the same to assessee, such notice is invalid and consequently, the assessment is also invalid. In support of his contentions that - non-service of notice is a jurisdictional defect and cannot be cured by Section 2…

B.M. Land Developers and Builders, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1146/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

…t recorded in the docket order of the assessment records. Therefore, it is not clear as to whether notice by affixture has really been served on assessee. Further, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Avi-oil India Pvt. Ltd., (2010) [323 ITR 242] (P&H) has held that – notice should not only be issued but should also have been served on the assessee within the stipulated period and in the absence of a valid notice, the assessment is initiated. The Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal at Pune in the case of Anil Kisanlal Marda in ITA No.1763/PUN/2013, dt.01-07-2019 has held as under: “17. We…

Payal Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Appellant Respondent ITA No. A.Y. Rajkumar Jindal, 56/Hyd/19 2010-11 HYDERABAD [PAN: ACMPJ5612M] Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), HYDERABAD Smt. Payal Jindal, 57/Hyd/19 2010-11 HYDERABAD [PAN: AEAPJ5314E] For Assessee : Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, AR For Revenue : Smt. V. Aparna, DR Date of Hearing : 03-06-2019 Date of Pronouncement : 03-07-2019 O R D E R PER Smt. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. : Both are appeals filed by the respective assessees for the AY.201…

Rajkumar Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

Anil Kisanlal Marda, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Pune

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1763/PUN/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Vikas Awasthy

Section 143(2)

…view point of the ld. DR. In reaching this conclusion, the Hon’ble High Court relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Banarasi Devi Vs. ITO (1964) 53 ITR 100 (SC) and dissented with its own judgment in CIT Vs. Avi- oil India Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 242 (P&H) in which it was held that notice u/s.143(2) should not only be issued but also 18 Anil Kisanlal Marda served within the stipulated period and in the absence of such a valid service, the assessment is vitiated. 21.3. Similarly, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in Shanabhai P. Patel vs. R. K. Upadhyaya, ITO (1974) 96 ITR 141 (Guj) dealt wit…

Veerendra Kumar Patel, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 295/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2013-14 Veerendra Kumar Patel, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 4(2), Hyderabad Pan – Agxpp 9795L Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Siddharth Toshnival Revenue By: Shri R. Mohan Kumar Date Of Hearing: 15/04/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2019 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth ToshnivalFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Kumar

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…of jurisdiction. 2. CIT Vs. Ramendra Nath Ghosh, 82 ITR 888 (SC), in the matter of service of notice by affixture. 3. CIT Vs. Hotline International P. Ltd., 296 ITR 333 (Del.) in the matter of service of notice by Affixture. 4. CIT Vs. AVI-Oil India P. Ltd., 323 ITR 242 (P&H) 5. CIT Vs. Dr. KC Verma, 26 ITR (Del.) holding that best judgment assessment is not valid without service of notice u/s 142(1) of the Act. 10 I.T.A. No. 295/Hyd/2018 Veerendra Kumar Patel, Hyd. 9. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. With regard to Ground Nos. 2 to 4 on jurisdiction issue, we shall discuss…

ITO, WD-47(3), Kolkata vs. Sri Ramanand Kedia, Howrah

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue on all the grounds is dismissed

ITA 594/KOL/2015[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jan 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.594/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2007-08) Ito Ward-47(3), Vs. Sri Ramanand Kedia, 3, Govt. Place (West). 108/4/1, Adinath Apartment, Kolkata-700001 G.T.Road, Howrah-711 106 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Akcpk 4042 N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, Jcit Sr.Dr Assessee By : Shri M.D.Shah, Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 13/01/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2007-2008, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Kolkata, In Appeal No.79/Cit(A)-14/Wd-46(3)/12-13, Dated 13.03.2015, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (In Short The ‘Act’), Dated 31.12.2009. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Is An Individual, Engaged In The Business Of Trading Of Cloths. Assessee Filed His Return Of Income On 29.10.2007 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.2,06,368/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny & Statutory Notice U/S.143(2) Was Issued. Thereafter The Ao Framed The Assessment By Making Various Additions. 3. Aggrieved From The Order Of Ld. Ao, The Assessee Filed An Appeal

For Appellant: Shri M.D.Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel, JCIT Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 292B

…n minor daughter is not a valid service. Though the Assessing Officer stated that the appellant responded to notice under sec. 143(2) seeking for adjournment, he has not mentioned the date of service of the said notice. In CIT v. Avi-Oil India (P.) Ltd. [2010]323 ITR 242 (Punj.&Har.), it had been held that resort cannot be had to section 292B to validate mandatory requirement of service as postulated in section 143(2). As regards the last notice issued on 24-11-2009 fixing the hearing on 01-12-2009, the emotional finding of the Assessing Officer as earlier reproduced, has been that "Being encumbered by the luggag…

M/S. Mico Steels (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 1669/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadi N. Mishra

For Appellant: Sh. KC Singhal, A.RFor Respondent: Sh. Umesh Chander Dubey, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 234DSection 282(2)(b)

…us case laws of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and the Hon’ble High Courts and especially draw the attention towards the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Ramendra Nath Ghosh 82 ITR 888 SC and CIT Vs. Naveen Chander 323 ITR 242 (P&H). In view of the above, he requested that assessment in dispute may be cancelled by accepting the appeal filed by the assessee. 6 6. On the contrary, Ld. DR opposed the aforesaid request of the Ld. A.R. of the Assessee. He relied upon the orders of the authorities below and requested that the same may be upheld. 7. We have heard both the p…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-11(4), Bangalore vs. M/S Indo American Hybrid Seeds India P Ltd, Bangalore

ITA 1283/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 11(4), Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S.Indo American Hybrid Seeds India Pvt.Ltd. Pb No.7099, 7Th Km, Banashankari-Kengeri Link Road,Channasandra Village, Subramanyapura Po, Bangalore-560001. … Respondent Pa No.Aaaci 4027 J & Cross Objn.No.142/Bang/2015 (In Ita No.1283/Bang/2014) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) (By The Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri S.Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal,JCIT(DR)

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292B

…ITA No.1283/B/2014 & CO No.142/B/2015 Page 10 of 23 High Court, in the case of V.R.A.Cotton Mills (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India (2013)(359 ITR 495) after referring to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. AVI-OIL India (P) Ltd. (2010)323 ITR 242)(Punj.&Har.) & ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 188 Taxman 113)(SC) as well as earlier decisions which have been rendered on the issue of notice u/s 143(2) held that earlier judgments are rendered in ignorance of statutory and other binding precedents and therefore, do not lay down any binding principle and the same are per incuriam. The relevant…