How many judgments cite CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal?

225 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal (417 ITR 325), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(2), Section 148, Section 147, Section 143(3), Section 292BB, Section 142(1).

CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

417 ITR 325Supreme Court of India2019#396 most cited

What is CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal authority for?

Issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) is a mandatory requirement for completing an assessment when a return is filed, including reassessment under Section 147/143(3). The complete absence of this notice renders the assessment invalid and is not curable by Section 292BB.

225

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Laxman Das Khandelwal · Section 143(2) notice mandatory · non-issuance of notice · assessment invalid · Section 292BB · curative provision · service of notice · Section 147 reassessment · Section 143(3) assessment · Hotel Blue Moon affirmed

Also reported as

108 Taxmann.com 183266 Taxmann 171310 CTR 8

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 148 Section 147 Section 143(3)Section 292BB Section 142(1)Section 139 Section 144

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 292bb section 292b section 124(3)section 292 section 120 section 29 section 124 section 158bc service of notice section 127 section 139(4)section 158

Judgments citing CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal

ACIT-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda (E- Vijaya Bank), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2583/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292B

…tions regarding issuance as well as service of notice in case such assessee failed to do so in the assessment/reassessment proceedings. However, we find that Hon’ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 417 ITR 325 (SC)[13-08- 2019] held that Section 292BB of the Act does not save complete absence of notice. For Section 292BB of the Act to apply, the notice must have emanated from the department. The relevant extract of the aforesaid judgment of the 10 ITA 2534 -2583 Mum 2024 Bank of Baroda “e-Vijaya Bank” Hon’ble Supreme Court reads as under: “2. These Ap…

Bank of Baroda (Erstwhile Vijaya Bank), Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue is

ITA 2534/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292B

…tions regarding issuance as well as service of notice in case such assessee failed to do so in the assessment/reassessment proceedings. However, we find that Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal [2019] 417 ITR 325 (SC)[13-08- 2019] held that Section 292BB of the Act does not save complete absence of notice. For Section 292BB to apply, the notice must have emanated from the department. The relevant extract of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reads as under: “2. These Appeals are directed against the judgment and final order dated 27.04.20…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Noida vs. Rba Buildtech Private Limited, Noida

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No 4651/Del is

ITA 4472/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 4651/Del/Del/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) Rba Buildtech Private Limited Vs Dcit/Acit A-66, Sector 63, Noida, Central Circle-1, 2Nd Floor, Uttar Pradesh Arto Complex, Ssector- Pan: Aagcr928Sf 33, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292BSection 68

…1 ITA Nos. 4651 & 4472/Del/2024 RBA Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [DELHIBENCH:“A” New Delhi] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 4651/Del/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) RBA Buildtech Private limited Vs DCIT/ACIT A-66, Sector 63, Noida, Central Circle-1, 2nd floor, Uttar Pradesh ARTO Complex, Ssector- PAN: AAGCR928SF 33, Noida, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent I.T.A. No. 4472/Del/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) DCIT/ACIT Vs RBA Buildtech Private Central Circle-1, limited,A-66, Sector 63, 2nd Floor, ARTO Complex, Noida, Uttar P…

Kvrecpl - Irpinfratech (Jv), Vijayawada vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 373/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 251(1)(a)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी रवीश सूद, माननीय "याियक सद"य एवं "ी एस बालाकृ"णन, माननीय लेखा सद"य SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 373/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year:2017-18) KVRECPL – IRPINFRATECH (JV) VS. The Assistant Commissioner of D. No. 54-20-6, Kanakadurga Income Tax, Gazetted Officers Colony, Circle-2(1), Gurunanak Colony, Vijayawada. Vijayawada -520008, Andhra Pradesh. PAN: AAQFK1247B (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""थ"/ Respondent) करदाताका"ितिनिध"/ : Shri MV Prasad, CA Assess…

Raghav Kumar Dhoot, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle 1, Jaipur

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

ITA 491/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri C.M. Agarwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT- DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 292BSection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठौड़ कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. No. 491/JPR/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2018-19 Sh. Raghav Kumar Dhoot B-9, Bais Godown Industrial Estate, Jaipur. बनाम Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle-1, Jaipur. स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGXPD1233F अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Shri C.M. Agarwal, C.A. राजस्व…

Vinod Mongia, Wast Azad Nagar, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer, Vikas Bhawan, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1844/DEL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Vinod Mongia, Vs Ito, C-40, Street No.1A, West Ward-58(7), Azad Nagar, Delhi-110005. Vikas Bhawan, Pan-Akhpm6218R Delhi Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Shivam Jain, Adv. & Shri Nitin Kanwar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31.07.2025

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…s an admitted fact by the Revenue. On this issue, the observations of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hotel Blue Moon (supra), which was further supported by the view taken by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal reported in [2019] 417 ITR 325 (SC), wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has referred to the judgment in the case of Hotel Blue Moon (supra) and had affirmed the proposition laid down therein. 12. Respectfully following the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court, in the Judgments referred (supra), which is followed by ITAT, Delhi Benches regularly, we find substance in the c…

Anil Agarwal HUF, Delhi vs. Income Tax Ward-28(1), New Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 2594/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2594/Del/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 बनाम Anil Agarwal Huf Income Tax Officer, F-71,Second Floor, Vs. Ward-28(1), Main Green Park, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No.Aahha2179P अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 69

…d u/s 148 of the Act. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel submitted that non issuance of notice u/s 143(2) makes the impugned assessment order as bad in law. Reliance is placed on the following decisions in support of his contentions: 1. CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandewal 417 ITR 325 (SC); 2. Rajender Kumar Sehgal vs. ITO 414 ITR 286 (Del.); 3. PCIT vs. Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd. 398 ITR 701 (Del); 4. PCIT vs. Jai Shiv Shankar Trading P. Ltd. 388 ITR 448 (Del.); 5. CIT vs. Rajiv Sharma 336 ITR 678 (All.); 6. PCIT vs. Staunch Marketing Pvt. Ltd. 404 ITR 299 (Del). 4 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that…

Pramod Kumar Choudhary, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 206/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 69

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुर न्यायपीठ, जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, "SMC" JAIPUR डा० एस. सीतालक्ष्मी, न्यायिक सदस्य एवं श्री राठोड कमलेश जयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 206/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Pramod Kumar Choudhary Ward 12, Muhana Mod, New Power House Hajyawala, Sanganer, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Ward 7(2), Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: BACPC4828D अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CA र…

Arjun Rishi, Sainik Farms vs. ITO Ward 28(1), ITO Office Civic Centre

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

ITA 3020/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanarjun Rishi, Vs. Ito, Ward 28 (1), F – 79/18, Sainik Farms, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 062. (Pan : Agvpr4625D) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Arun Kishore, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date Of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 01.09.2023 For Assessment Year 2017-18 Raising Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. I) That The Order Of Ld. Cit (A) Nfac Delhi Confirming The Addition Of Rs.9,81,173/- Made By Ld. Ao Ward 28(1) Delhi Is Illegal, Unjust, Opposed To Facts & Suffers From The Vice Of Arbitrariness. Ii) That All Grounds Of Appeal Are Independent & Without Prejudice To Each Other.

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kishore, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 124(3)Section 127Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Arjun Rishi, vs. ITO, Ward 28 (1), F – 79/18, Sainik Farms, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 062. (PAN : AGVPR4625D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Arun Kishore, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.04.2025 Date of Order : 09.07.2025 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [he…

Bms Tradewings Pvt. Ltd., Jagdalpur vs. ACIT-1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 539/RPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 539/Rpr/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"Assessment Year: 2017-18)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…vant jurisdiction as per notification issued in this regard. ii) ACIT &Anr. vs. Ravneet Solutions P. Ltd. &Anr. (2017) 49 CCH 0156 Del. Trib iii) ACIT vs Hotel Blue Moon (2010) 321 ITR 362 (SC), PN 358 to 365; reaffirmed in CIT vs Laxman Das Khandelwal (2019) 417 ITR 325 (SC) iv) Raiendra Pathak vs. ADIT (Intl. Taxation) (2015) 44 CCH 0694 Jaipur Trib. It was held that the notice u/s 143(2) was required to be issued by the AO having jurisdiction over the assessee. As per the definition of Assessing Officer, the assessing officer is the officer who is vested with jurisdiction as per order under sub section (1) or…

Pandurang Daulatrao Korde, Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 5(1), Nagpur

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 125/NAG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrypandurang Daulatrao Korde, Ito, Ward-5(1), Nagpur Pande Layout, Khamla, Nagpur. Vs. Pan: Acmpk 9991 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Moriyani, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 292BSection 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH :: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Pandurang Daulatrao Korde, ITO, Ward-5(1), Nagpur Pande Layout, Khamla, Nagpur. Vs. PAN: ACMPK 9991 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Bhavesh Moriyani, Ld. Adv. Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R. Date of Hearing : 27.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2025 O R D E R This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 24/12/2024 impugned herein passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal…

Raghu Satyanaryana Kollu, Kodad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 413/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…best of his judgment u/s 144 of the Act, dated 29.03.2022, we find that the said issue is covered by the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of ACIT and Anr. Vs. Hotel 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 A.O. pursuant to the return of income filed by the assessee remains under the statutory obligation to issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act for framing the assessment. 21. Our aforesaid view is further fortified by the judgment of th…

Raghu Satyanaryana Kollu, Kodad vs. ITO., Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 412/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Us:

Section 147Section 148Section 250

Geopetrol International Inc., Chennai vs. ACIT, Circle International Taxation1(3)1, New Delhi

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

ITA 2416/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: S/Shri Sanchit Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: S/Shri Vijay B Vasanta, CIT- DR &

Section 135Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(15)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 234ASection 282Section 40Section 92C

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िद"ी पीठ “डी ”, िद"ी "ी िवकास अव"थी, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी "जेशकुमारिसंह, लेखाकार सद"के सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.2416/िद"ी/2022 (िन.व. 2018-19) Geopetrol International Inc. Lakshmi Chambers, 192, St. Mary’s Road, Alwarpet Chennai, Tamil Naidu 600018 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant PAN: AAACG-2583-M बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle International Tax 1(3)(1), New Delhi ....."ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant by: S/Shri Sanchit Jain, Advocate & Gaur…

Let'S Talk Institute Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-War-12(3)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2138/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 143(2)Section 254(1)Section 68

…. Once assessment order is quashed from the addition made therein will becoming void and ab-initio to support this contention of Ld.AR of the assessee relied on Asst. CIT v. Hotel Blue Moon reported in 321 ITR 362(SC), CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal reported in 417 ITR 325(SC), Anantpur Kalpana v. ITO reported in 194 ITD 702 (Bangalore Trib.) and Pr.CIT v. Tripati Proteins (P.) Ltd. reported in 165 taxmann.com 175(Guj.). 5. The Ld.AR further submits that he is also raised grounds of appeal against reopening. The re-assessment was made merely for purpose of making enquiry. The assessment is initiated on borrowed sat…

Subhash Chander Gupta, H.No. 16528 Vishnu Colony, Raliway Road, Kurukshetra, Haryana vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Kurukshetra

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are

ITA 768/CHANDI/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Abhinav Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153C

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 765/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Subhash Chander Gupta, The ITO, Vs House No. 1652 8, Vishnu Colony, Ward 3, Railway Road, Kurukshetra. Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAUPG0038Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 768/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Subhash Chander Gupta, The JCIT, Vs House No. 1652 8, Vishnu Colony, Kurukshetra. R…

Subhash Chander Gupta, H.No. 1652 8 Vishnu Colony, Railway Road, Kurukshetra, Haryana vs. ITO Ward-3, Kurukshetra, Haryana

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are

ITA 765/CHANDI/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh07 Apr 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri Abhinav Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 153C

Jagdish Prasad Agarwala, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 44(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1798/KOL/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Mar 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana, ARsFor Respondent: Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR

Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 292BSection 69D

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA No.1798/KOL/2024 (Assessment Year:2018-19) Jagdish Prasad Agarwala E-126, Atmosphere, 1001A, E.M. Bypass, Govinda Khatick Road, Kolkata-700046, West Bengal (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward-44(1) Income Tax Office, 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata-700001 West Bengal (Respondent) PAN No. ACQPA1306F Assessee by : Shri S.M. Surana & Sunil Surana, ARs Revenue by : Shri P.N. Barnwal, DR Date of hearing: 10.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 17.03.2025 ORDER Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal pr…

Bannavatu Tulasi, Kanchikacherla vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 451/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri K Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. 451/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Baanavatu Tulasi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, M.P.P. School, Kopthapet, Ward-1(1), Kanchikacherla, Vijayawada. Krishna-521180. Pan: Afcpt1634C (अपीलधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Mv Prasad, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri MV Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 24Section 69

…ailure of the Ld. AO to issue notice U/s. 143(2) of the Act, prior to finalizing the re - assessment order, cannot be curable by the provisions of section 292BB of the Act. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (2019) 417 ITR 325 (SC) held that “it is to be noted that the section 292BB of the Act does not save complete absence of notice. For section 292BB to apply, the notice must have emanated from the Department. It is only the infirmities in the manner of service of notice that the section seeks to cure. The section is not intended to cure complete absence of notice it…

Desh Raj Jakhar, Gordhanpura vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Neem Ka Thana

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1261/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shaffi Mohd. AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR

Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 5Section 69

…ld that a valid notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory when the AO seeks to regularize a return filed in response to a notice under Section 148, failing which the entire assessment can be invalidated. d) Additionally, in CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal ((2019) 417 ITR 325 (SC)], it was reiterated that the failure to issue notice under Section 143(2) before completing the assessment would render the assessment void. In this case the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that according to Section 29BB of the Act, if the assessee had participated in the proceedings, by way of legal fiction, notice would deemed to be valid even…