CIT v. Dey Brothers

3 ITR 213Reported decision#20935 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282Section 292BB

Issues it is cited on

section 292bbsection 282section 292bsection 292service of noticesection 29section 28notice under section 148reassessment proceedingssection 271(1)(c)section 139section 27

Judgments citing CIT v. Dey Brothers

DCIT, CIRCLE- 23(2), NEW DELHI vs. SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 5823/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Atul Puri, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rajinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282

…e default. However, acquisition of knowledge in regard to issuance of a notice, the Hon’ble Court held, could not be considered as equivalent to, or a substitute for, the service of the notice on the assessee. A similar view was taken in CIT vs. Dey Brothers, 3 ITR 213 (Rang.), where the Court held that the mere fact that the notice had in some way or other reached ITAs No.5485 & 3382/Del/2017 the person upon whom it was to be served was not sufficient to comply with a requirements of a proper service of notice. 8. The reasoning adopted by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. Silver Line…

SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 24(2), NEW DELHI

ITA 5485/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Atul Puri, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rajinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282

…e default. However, acquisition of knowledge in regard to issuance of a notice, the Hon’ble Court held, could not be considered as equivalent to, or a substitute for, the service of the notice on the assessee. A similar view was taken in CIT vs. Dey Brothers, 3 ITR 213 (Rang.), where the Court held that the mere fact that the notice had in some way or other reached ITAs No.5485 & 3382/Del/2017 the person upon whom it was to be served was not sufficient to comply with a requirements of a proper service of notice. 8. The reasoning adopted by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. Silver Line…

SKYLINE ENGINEERING CONTRACTS (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

ITA 3382/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Atul Puri, CAFor Respondent: Ms Rajinder Kaur, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282

…e default. However, acquisition of knowledge in regard to issuance of a notice, the Hon’ble Court held, could not be considered as equivalent to, or a substitute for, the service of the notice on the assessee. A similar view was taken in CIT vs. Dey Brothers, 3 ITR 213 (Rang.), where the Court held that the mere fact that the notice had in some way or other reached ITAs No.5485 & 3382/Del/2017 the person upon whom it was to be served was not sufficient to comply with a requirements of a proper service of notice. 8. The reasoning adopted by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT v. Silver Line…

PSA NITROGEN LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-19(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 84/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Sh. Devesh K. Malan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR

…A Nitrogen Ltd. Reliance is placed on the case of B. Johar Forest Works v. CIT, 107 ITR 409 (J&K), wherein which the Hon’ble Court has held that "mere knowledge of notice is not equivalent to proper service.” Further reliance is placed on CIT V. Dey Brothers 3 ITR 213 (Ray) Wherein which the Hon’ble Court has held that "the mere fact that the notice had in some way or other reached the person upon whom it was to be served was not sufficient to comply with a requirement of proper service of notice.” B. BECAUSE the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate the intention of the Legislature…

CIT v. Dey Brothers (3 ITR 213) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax