CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd.

296 ITR 333High Court2008#2469 most cited

What is CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 specifies the modes for serving notices, including by post or summons under the Code of Civil Procedure. A valid service of notice is essential for assessment or reassessment proceedings, and its absence renders such proceedings bad in law.

47

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. · service of notice · Section 282 · Income Tax Act · mode of service · Section 148 notice · invalid notice · reassessment proceedings quashed · presumption of service · Section 27 General Clauses Act · CPC Order V Rule 19A

Also reported as

161 Taxmann 104

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 143(2)Section 69ASection 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 282(1)section 148(1)section 282section 292bbsection 292bwithin four yearssection 21service of noticesection 292ex-parte assessmentsection 29section 28

Judgments citing CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd.

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2569/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ाय पीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM I.T.A. No. 2569/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 2568/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, CIT (A), Ward-41(3)(3), E Wing, 1302, The Spring, Kautilya Bhavan, Plot No. 4, Road Pali, Sector-20, Mumbai. Kalamboli Node, Raigarh, Vs. Kalamboli Node, Maharashtra-410218. PAN: AEOPG9568B Assessee -अपीलाथ" / Appellant Revenue - ""थ" / Respondent : Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Natekar, AR Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR 06.01.2026…

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2568/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण "ाय पीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM I.T.A. No. 2569/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) I.T.A. No. 2568/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, CIT (A), Ward-41(3)(3), E Wing, 1302, The Spring, Kautilya Bhavan, Plot No. 4, Road Pali, Sector-20, Mumbai. Kalamboli Node, Raigarh, Vs. Kalamboli Node, Maharashtra-410218. PAN: AEOPG9568B Assessee -अपीलाथ" / Appellant Revenue - ""थ" / Respondent : Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Natekar, AR Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR 06.01.2026…

Maya Kumari, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 2(2), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 581/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Nov 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250Section 69

…Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. Affirmed by theDelhi High Court 382 ITR 613 (Del.) CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), followed. The same contention is favoured by many land mark judgment which are as follows; Honorable ITAT, Agra Bench in M/s K.P. Cold Storage Vs ITO ITA No. 145/Agra/2018 had held that; In the present case AO on basis of information received from the ADIT(Inv.) that there were huge cash deposits in the ba…

Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Jaipur

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 772/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…147. If no notice is issued or if the notice issued is shown to be invalid, then the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer without a notice or in pursuance of an invalid notice would be illegal and void.' In CIT v. Hotline International (P) Ltd. [2008] 296 ITR 333 (Delhi) this court held that affixation of notice on an address at which the security guard of the assessee-company refuses to receive such notice cannot be construed to be a proper service of notice under section 148 of the Act. The security guard was not Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta vs. ITO an agent of the assessee and therefore, the reassessment pro…

Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Jaipur

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 771/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A

…147. If no notice is issued or if the notice issued is shown to be invalid, then the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer without a notice or in pursuance of an invalid notice would be illegal and void.' In CIT v. Hotline International (P) Ltd. [2008] 296 ITR 333 (Delhi) this court held that affixation of notice on an address at which the security guard of the assessee-company refuses to receive such notice cannot be construed to be a proper service of notice under section 148 of the Act. The security guard was not an agent of the assessee and therefore, the reassessment proceedings were held to be bad in…

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

…rsonally or any substituted services. Then as per the report filed by the Ld. DR, there is no evidence of issuance of the notice for its service in the assessment record. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. 296 ITR 333 has held that section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 lays down the mode of service of notices. According to it, any notice under the Income Tax Act has to be served on the person named therein either by post or summons issued by the court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 order V, Rule 19A of the Code of Civil Procedure provides for simult…

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

…rsonally or any substituted services. Then as per the report filed by the Ld. DR, there is no evidence of issuance of the notice for its service in the assessment record. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. 296 ITR 333 has held that section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 lays down the mode of service of notices. According to it, any notice under the Income Tax Act has to be served on the person named therein either by post or summons issued by the court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 order V, Rule 19A of the Code of Civil Procedure provides for simult…

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

…rsonally or any substituted services. Then as per the report filed by the Ld. DR, there is no evidence of issuance of the notice for its service in the assessment record. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. 296 ITR 333 has held that section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 lays down the mode of service of notices. According to it, any notice under the Income Tax Act has to be served on the person named therein either by post or summons issued by the court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 order V, Rule 19A of the Code of Civil Procedure provides for simult…

Koshal Kishor Sharma, Jaipur vs. DCIT(Intl. Tax.) Jaipur, Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 862/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT-DR
Section 147Section 148ASection 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

…Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. Affirmed by theDelhi High Court 382 ITR 613 (Del.) CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), followed. 3.6 The ld. AO has not stated that at what address he has sent the notices and on whom the same was served. As the mandatory condition for reopening of the assessment could not have been fulfilled. Proper service of the notice u/s 148 is mandatory condition upon the assessee but Ld. AO could not…

Koshal Kishor Sharma, Jaipur vs. DCIT(Intl. Tax), Jaipur

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 861/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT-DR
Section 147Section 148ASection 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69Section 69A

…Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. Affirmed by theDelhi High Court 382 ITR 613 (Del.) CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), followed. 3.6 The ld. AO has not stated that at what address he has sent the notices and on whom the same was served. As the mandatory condition for reopening of the assessment could not have been fulfilled. Proper service of the notice u/s 148 is mandatory condition upon the assessee but Ld. AO could not…

Vimla Devi Meena, Dausa vs. ITO Ward- Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1034/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 234ASection 250

…at notice u/s 148 was served on the assessee for A.Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), followed. The above decision has been affirmed by the Honble High Court Delhi refer CIT v/s Chetan Gupta 94 CCH 13(Del). In the case of A.K. Kochandi & Ors. vs. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER(1975) 43 CCH 0749 KerHC (1976) 1976 CTR 0072 (KER) : (1977) 110 ITR 0406held that Assessment—Best judgment asses…

Prabhati Devi, Dausa vs. ITO Ward Dausa, Dausa

ITA 1031/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur01 Oct 2024AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sarwan Kumar Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Chaudhary, JCIT D/R
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 250

…at notice u/s 148 was served on the assessee for A.Y. 2001-02. In the absence of a valid service of notice u/s 148 on the assessee the reassessment proceedings for AY2001-02 are bad in law, consequently they are quashed. CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd 296 ITR 333 (Del); Hotel Blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC), followed. The above decision has been affirmed by the Honble High Court Delhi refer CIT v/s Chetan Gupta 94 CCH 13(Del). In the case of A.K. Kochandi & Ors.vs. Agricultural Income Tax Officer (1975) 43 CCH 0749 KerHC (1976) 1976 CTR 0072 (KER) : (1977) 110 ITR 0406held that Assessment—Best judgment assessm…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Delhi vs. M/S Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd

ITA/10/2022HC Delhi17 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 146Section 147Section 148

…ed that there is no reference to the notice server's report in the assessment order. The burden of service of Section 148 notice rests on the appellant/revenue, which has not been discharged in this case. [See CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 333 (Delhi HC); CIT v. Chetan Gupta (2016) 382 ITR 613 (Delhi HC)]. (ii) The reliance placed on the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act is misdirected for the following reasons. First, the appellant/revenue did not advance this argument before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, therefore, had no occasion to deal with this submission. Second, in the…

Shri Mohammad Abbas Ashraf, Srinagar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Srinagar

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

ITA 207/ASR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Yashender Garg, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 148Section 44A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 207/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mohammad Abbas Ashraf Vs. Income Tax Officer, Chack Sadribal, Near REC, Ward-II, Srinagar Hazratbal, Srinagar, Jammu & Kashmir, 190006 [PAN: AONPA1303B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None (Written submission) Respondent by : Sh. Yashender Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against…

Smt. Pushpa Chhajer, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 136/JODH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur02 Aug 2023AY 2014-15
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 234B

…td. ITA No. 3608 of 2014 (ITAT Delhi) Date of order 08.07.2015 iv. CIT vs. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC), 219 CTR 588 v. CIT vs. Eqbal Singh Sindhana 304 ITR 177 (Delhi) vi. ACIT vs. Vindhya Talylinks Ltd. 107 TTJ 149 (JAB)(TM) CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) vii. CIT vs. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P&H) (HC) viii. Ram Singh Mathur vs. ITO, ITA 834/2005, date of order 21.09.2007 (Delhi ITAT) ix. Venkat Naicken & Anr. vs. ITO, 242 ITR 141 (Madras High Court) p] That on identical facts the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT V/s Ashok Kumar Bharti and Vijay Kumar 198 CTR ALL 260 aft…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-15(1)., Hyderabad vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Nagari Satya., Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed”

ITA 1347/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Sridhar Reddy Jagan Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Nagari Satya, Circle 15(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year:2012-13 A.C.I.T. Vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Circle 15(1) Nagari Satya, Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The 2Nd One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27.3.2017 Cit (A)-7, Hyderabad Relating To The A.Y 2012-13. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…Court and the Apex Court, that for proper assumption of jurisdiction by the assessing officer, a valid service of notice in terms of section 282 (1) of the Act is a mandatory legal requirement. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Hotline International 296 ITR 333 has held as under “22. As per order V, r.12 of the CPC referred to above, wherever it is practicable, the service has to be effected on defendant in person or on his agent. Admittedly, in the present case, notice under S. 148 of the Act was not tendered to the assessee nor the same was refused at all by the assessee. It is an admitted case of the…

Sridhar Reddy Jagan Nagari Satya., Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-15(1)., Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed”

ITA 1248/HYD/2017[A.Y- 2012-13,]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year:2012-13 Sridhar Reddy Jagan Vs. Dy. C.I.T. Nagari Satya, Circle 15(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year:2012-13 A.C.I.T. Vs. Sridhar Reddy Jagan Circle 15(1) Nagari Satya, Hyderabad Secunderabad Pan:Adapj3782D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 08/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2022 Order Per R.K. Panda, A.M These Are Cross Appeals. The First One Is Filed By The Assessee & The 2Nd One Is Filed By The Revenue & Are Directed Against The Order Dated 27.3.2017 Cit (A)-7, Hyderabad Relating To The A.Y 2012-13. For The Sake Of Convenience, These Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order.

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…Court and the Apex Court, that for proper assumption of jurisdiction by the assessing officer, a valid service of notice in terms of section 282 (1) of the Act is a mandatory legal requirement. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Hotline International 296 ITR 333 has held as under “22. As per order V, r.12 of the CPC referred to above, wherever it is practicable, the service has to be effected on defendant in person or on his agent. Admittedly, in the present case, notice under S. 148 of the Act was not tendered to the assessee nor the same was refused at all by the assessee. It is an admitted case of the…

Naveen Tyagi, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 2089/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2089/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Naveen Tyagi Ito C/O M/S Sanjeev Anand & Vs. Ward 1(2), Associates, 77, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Admpt7873K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…. Ltd. ITA No. 3608 of 2014 (ITAT Delhi) Date of order 08.07.2015 • CIT vs. Avtar Singh (P&H) (HC), 219 CTR 588 • CIT vs. Eqbal Singh Sindhana 304 ITR 177 (Delhi) • ACIT vs. Vindhya Talylinks Ltd. 107 TTJ 149 (JAB)(TM) • CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) I.T.A.No.2089/Del/2018 • CIT vs. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P&H) (HC) • Ram Singh Mathur vs. ITO, ITA 834/2005, date of order 21.09.2007 (Delhi ITAT) • Venkat Naicken & Anr. vs. ITO, 242 ITR 141 (Madras High Court) The Ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the decision of Delhi Bench, SMC in the case of Akhtar Khan Vs. ITO, ITA No. 138…

Akhtar Khan, Noida vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Noida

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated

ITA 138/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.138/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 बनाम Akhtar Khan Ito C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, Vs. Ward 1(1), South Extension, Part-1, Noida. New Delhi. Pan No. Amapk6768M अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…isions: 1 I.T.A.No.138/Del/2018 1. CIT vs. Eshaan Holdings (P) Ltd. 345 ITR 541 (Del); 2. CIT Vs. Chetan Gupta 382 ITR 613 (Del); 3. Pr. CIT Vs. Atlanta Capital Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 665/2015 dated 21.09.2015 (Del. HC); 4. CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del) (HC); 5. CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar Sharma 311 ITR 235 (Del) (HC); 6. CIT Vs. Avtar Singh 219 CTR 588 (P&H High Court). 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that on inspection of the records it is found that the notice was sent to the old address of the assessee and the notice was returned by the postal authorities and the same was kept on…

Rakesh Vaid, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 62(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA no

ITA 7821/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…l as the order under section 144/147, and the consequential action, i.e., attachment of the assessee’s accounts are hereby quashed.” 3.6 Reliance here is also placed on the following judicial pronouncements: a) 213 Taxation 93 CIT (Del) CIT vs. Mani Kakar b) 296 ITR 333 (Del) CIT vs. Hotline International (P) Ltd. c) 178 ITR 591 (P&H) CIT v Harparshad d) 206 Taxation 312 (P&H) CIT vs. LaxmiNarain e) 229 CTR 188 (P&H) CIT vs. Cebon India Ltd. f) CIT vs. Eshaan Holding (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 1171/2008 dated 31.08.2009 (Del) g) CIT vs. Chandra Agencies ITA No. 99, 100 and 125 of 2004 dated 201.0.2010 (Del) h) 208 Tax…